Induction or spontaneous labor for pregnant patients on anticoagulants?

OBJECTIVE: There are two approaches to peripartum management for pregnant patients undergoing anticoagulation treatments: spontaneous labor or scheduling an induction. A long interval without anticoagulation is a thrombosis risk factor, while a short interval leads to risks of delivery without epidural analgesia or post partum hemorrhage. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of planned induction versus spontaneous labor on obtaining neuraxial analgesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted from 2012 to 2020 including all patients on preventive or curative low molecular-weight heparin at the time of delivery, excluding planned cesarean sections. The rates of neuraxial analgesia were compared between two groups: spontaneous labor and induction, as well as the intervals without anticoagulants. RESULTS: 127 patients were included. In the spontaneous labor group, 78% (44/56) received neuraxial analgesia versus 88% (37/42) in the induction group (p = 0.29). For curative dose treatment, the rate of neuraxial analgesia was 45,5% in the spontaneous group versus 78,6% (p = 0.12). The median time without anticoagulation was 34 h [26-46] in the spontaneous labor group and 43 h [34-54] in the induction group (p = 0.01), without an increased incidence of thrombosis. The rate of postpartum hemorrhage did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Planned induction tended to increase the rate of neuraxial analgesia, without reaching significance, and most women in spontaneous labor accessed analgesia. Peripartum management should be a shared decision with the patient considering the obstetrical and thrombosis risk context for each patient.

[Management of major postpartum hemorrhage]. / Prise en charge des hémorragies graves du postpartum.

Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is defined by loss of greater than 500 mL of blood following vaginal delivery or 1,000 mL of blood following cesarean section, in the first 24 hours postpartum. Its incidence is up to 5% and the severe forms represent 1% of births. PPH is the first cause of obstetrical maternal mortality in France and 90% of these deaths are considered as preventable. Its management is multidisciplinary (obstetricians, anesthetists, midwives, biologists and interventional radiologists), based on treatment protocols where time is a major prognosis factor. In case of failure of the initial measures (oxytocin, manual placenta removal, uterus and birth canal examination), the management of severe forms includes active resuscitation (intravenous fluids, blood transfusion, vasoactive drugs), haemostatic interventions (sulprostone, tamponnade and haemostatic suture, surgical procedures and arterial embolization) and the correction of any potential coagulopathy (administration of blood products and haemostatic agents).

Should We Monitor ScVO(2) in Critically Ill Patients?

Hemodynamic monitoring has become a real challenge in the intensive care unit. As an integrative parameter for oxygen supply/demand, venous oxygen saturation (SvO(2)) provided by pulmonary artery catheterization is one of the most popular parameters to assess the adequacy of cardiac output. However, technical limitations and potential iatrogenic complications constitute important limits for a widespread use. Regular central venous catheters coupled with a fiberoptic lumen for central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO(2)) monitoring have been proposed as a surrogate for SvO(2) monitoring. The purpose of the present article is to review the physiological backgrounds of circulation, the pathophysiology of circulatory failure and subsequent venous oxygen saturation alterations, and finally the merits and the limits of the use of ScvO(2) in different clinical situations.