Neuraxial Morphine Anesthesia Given During Cesarean Delivery and Risk of Urinary Retention: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean deliveries (CD) are commonly performed using neuraxial anesthesia. The use of neuraxial morphine has proven beneficial in terms of postoperative pain management; however, its effect on postoperative urine retention remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether morphine injection into the neuraxis during CD influences postoperative urinary retention rate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control observational study of patients undergoing CD. We compared patients using morphine injected into the intrathecal or epidural spaces (November 2020 to October 2021) to a historical cohort of patients undergoing CD without morphine (November 2019 to October 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of postoperative overt urinary retention necessitating bladder catheterization. RESULTS: The study group comprised 283 patients, and 313 patients in the control group were eligible for analysis. No differences were found with respect to the baseline demographic and indication for CD. The number of postpartum urinary bladder catheterizations due to urine retention was higher in the study group (5% vs. 1%, P-value = 0.003). No cases of 30-day readmission were recorded. Moreover, patients treated with neuraxial morphine required fewer repeat doses of postoperative anesthesia (oral analgesia 7.4 vs. 10.1, intravenous analgesia 0.29 vs. 0.31, oral opioids 0.06 vs. 3.70, intravenous opioids 0.01 vs. 0.45, P-value < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: While neuraxial morphine used during CD appears to be safe and effective, the risk of postoperative urinary retention seems to be increased due to its use. Cases of overt urinary retention treated by bladder catheterization does not lead to short-term complications.

Comparison of the effects of norepinephrine and phenylephrine on shivering and hypothermia in patients undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia at a tertiary hospital in China：a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral vasodilation causes a redistribution of body temperature from the core to the periphery, resulting in shivering and hypothermia. These are normal pathological and physiological processes during spinal anaesthesia. Two drugs, norepinephrine and phenylephrine, have peripheral vasoconstrictive effects. It is unclear the effects of norepinephrine and phenylephrine on shivering and hypothermia in patients undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. METHODS ANALYSIS: 240 eligible parturients will be recruited for this randomised, double-blind, controlled trial and randomly assigned to either the norepinephrine or phenylephrine groups. The primary outcome will be the incidence of shivering while secondary outcomes will include the severity of shivering, rectal temperature, incidence of hypothermia and umbilical artery blood pH value. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Institutional Ethics Committee of The Second People's Hospital of Hefei approved the trial protocol (ID: 2023-093). The results will be published in a compliant journal. The original data will be released in December 2029 on the ResMan original data-sharing platform of the China Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.medresman.org.cn). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300077164.

Effect of norepinephrine and phenylephrine on prothrombotic response in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia: protocol for a randomized, double-blind, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Norepinephrine and phenylephrine are commonly used vasoactive drugs to treat hypotension during the perioperative period. The increased release of endogenous norepinephrine elicits prothrombotic changes, while parturients are generally in a hypercoagulable state. Therefore, this trial aims to investigate whether there is a disparity between equivalent doses of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion and phenylephrine infusion on prothrombotic response in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Sixty-six eligible parturients will be recruited for this trial and randomly assigned to the norepinephrine or phenylephrine group. The "study drug" will be administered at a rate of 15 ml/h starting from the intrathecal injection. The primary outcome are plasma coagulation factor VIII activity (FVIII: C), fibrinogen, and D-dimer levels. The secondary outcomes include hemodynamic variables and umbilical artery blood pH value. DISCUSSION: Our study is the first trial comparing the effect of norepinephrine and phenylephrine on prothrombotic response in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Positive or negative results will all help us better understand the impact of vasoactive drugs on patients. If there are any differences, this trial will provide new evidence for maternal choice of vasoactive medications in the perioperative period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2300077164. Registered on 1 November 2023. https://www.chictr.org.cn/ .

Effectiveness of Hydromorphone Hydrochloride Combined with Bupivacaine for Combined Spinal and Epidural Anaesthesia in Reducing Postpartum Urinary Retention: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum urinary retention is a common complication following caesarean section, with significant implications for patient comfort and recovery. Combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia is frequently employed for caesarean section, but postpartum urinary retention remains a clinical concern despite its benefits. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of hydromorphone hydrochloride combined with bupivacaine for combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia in reducing postpartum urinary retention. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who received combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section. The control group received bupivacaine, whereas the hydromorphone hydrochloride combined with bupivacaine spinal-epidural anaesthesia (HB) group received hydromorphone hydrochloride combined with bupivacaine. Data on demographics, anaesthesia, operative characteristics, postoperative urinary retention and adverse events were collected and analysed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 105 patients, with a control group (n = 51) receiving bupivacaine spinal-epidural anaesthesia and an observation group (n = 54) receiving hydromorphone hydrochloride combined with bupivacaine spinal-epidural anaesthesia. The incidence of postoperative urinary retention was significantly lower in the HB group than in the control group (3.70% vs. 17.65%, p = 0.044). Furthermore, the HB group exhibited a shorter time to first voiding after anaesthesia (5.72 ± 1.26 h vs. 6.28 ± 1.35 h, p = 0.029), lower peak postvoid residual volume (168.57 ± 25.09 mL vs. 180.43 ± 30.21 mL, p = 0.032), decreased need for postoperative catheterisation (5.56% vs. 21.57%, p = 0.034) and shorter duration of urinary catheterisation (10.92 ± 2.61 h vs. 12.04 ± 2.87 h, p = 0.039) than the control group. Correlation analysis supported a negative correlation between hydromorphone supplementation and parameters related to postoperative urinary retention. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated a significant association between the duration of urinary catheterisation and the use of hydromorphone with the occurrence of postoperative urinary retention, providing further insights into the multifactorial nature of this postoperative complication. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of hydromorphone hydrochloride to bupivacaine for combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia was associated with a reduced incidence of postpartum urinary retention and improved postoperative voiding parameters, without significantly increasing the risk of adverse events.

Effect of intravenous palonosetron on hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravenous palonosetron compared to ondansetron on hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia in women undergoing cesarean section. METHODS: Fifty-four women scheduled for elective cesarean section were, randomly allocated to ondansetron group (n = 27) or palonosetron group (n = 27). Ten minutes prior to the administration of spinal anesthesia, participants received an intravenous injection of either ondansetron or palonosetron. A prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was initiated immediately following the intrathecal administration of bupivacaine and fentanyl. The infusion rate was titrated to maintain adequate blood pressure until the time of fetal delivery. The primary outcome was total dose of phenylephrine administered. The secondary outcomes were nausea or vomiting, the need for rescue antiemetics, hypotension, bradycardia, and shivering. Complete response rate, defined as the absence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and no need for additional antiemetics, were assessed for up to 24 hours post-surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in the total dose of phenylephrine used between the ondansetron and palonosetron groups (387.5 µg [interquartile range, 291.3-507.8 µg versus 428.0 µg [interquartile range, 305.0-507.0 µg], P = 0.42). Complete response rates also showed no significant differences between the groups both within two hours post-spinal anesthesia (88.9% in the ondansetron group versus 100% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.24) and at 24 hours post-surgery (81.5% in the ondansetron group versus 88.8% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.7). In addition, there was no difference in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic administration of palonosetron did not demonstrate a superior effect over ondansetron in mitigating hemodynamic changes or reducing phenylephrine requirements in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl for cesarean section.

Dose-Response Study of Norepinephrine Infusion for Maternal Hypotension in Preeclamptic Patients Undergoing Cesarean Delivery Under Spinal Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Spinal anesthesia remains the preferred mode of anesthesia for preeclamptic patients during cesarean delivery. We investigated the incidence of maternal hypotension under spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery, by comparing different prophylactic infusion rates of norepinephrine with normal saline. METHODS: We randomly allocated 180 preeclamptic patients (45 in each groups) aged 18-45 scheduled for cesarean delivery to receive one of four prophylactic norepinephrine infusions at doses of 0 (normal saline group), 0.025 (0.025 group), 0.05 (0.05 group), or 0.075 (0.075 group) µg/kg/min following spinal anesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of maternal hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 80% of baseline). RESULTS: The incidence of maternal hypotension was reduced with different prophylactic infusion rates of norepinephrine (26.7%, 15.6%, and 6.7%) compared with normal saline (37.8%) with a significant decreasing trend (p = 0.002). As the infusion doses of norepinephrine increased, there is a significant decreasing trend in deviation of systolic blood pressure control (median performance error; median absolute performance error) from baseline (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) and need for rescue norepinephrine boluses (p = 0.020). The effective dose 50 and effective dose 90 of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion were - 0.018 (95% confidence interval - 0.074, 0.002) µg/kg/min and 0.065 (95% confidence interval 0.048, 0.108) µg/kg/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic infusion of norepinephrine, as compared to no preventive measures, can effectively reduce the incidence of maternal hypotension in preeclamptic patients under spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery, without increasing other adverse events for either the mother or neonate. REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov identifier number NCT04556370.

Effects of neuraxial anesthesia in sitting and lateral positions on maternal hemodynamics in cesarean section: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: During cesarean section, hypotension is a frequent side effect of spinal anesthesia. As a sitting or lateral position is required for spinal anesthesia performance, which of these two positions is more likely to cause intraoperative nausea, vomiting, and hypotension is still unknown. This meta-analysis compared the effects of these two positions on maternal hemodynamics and intraoperative nausea and vomiting. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Operating room. PATIENTS: This study included 803 patients from 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). INTERVENTIONS: Neuraxial anesthesia in sitting position vs. lateral position. MEASUREMENTS: We chose RCTs comparing the effects of spinal anesthesia in the sitting and lateral positions on maternal hemodynamics by thoroughly searching PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for articles published from database inception until October 31, 2022. The Cochrane Handbook was used to assess the methodological quality of each RCT; the results were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software; and the Egger test was used to assess publication bias. MAIN RESULTS: 12 randomised controlled trials with 803 participants were ultimately included in the final analysis. No significant differences were observed between the two positions in terms of the incidence of hypotension(RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.58-1.16; P = 0.26; I2 = 66%), lowest systolic blood pressure(MD, -0.81; 95% CI, -7.38-5.75; P = 0.81; I2 = 86%), the dose of ephedrine(MD, -1.19; 95% CI, -4.91-2.52; P = 0.53; I2 = 83%), and number of parturients requiring ephedrine(RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.64-1.46; P = 0.88; I2 = 74%). For the incidence of intraoperative nausea and vomiting, there was no statistical difference between the two positions. CONCLUSION: Parturients undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia in the sitting or lateral position experienced similar incidence of hypotension, and there were no significant differences between these two positions in terms of the amount of ephedrine administered or the number of patients needing ephedrine. In both positions, the frequency of nausea and vomiting was comparable. The ideal position for anesthesia can be chosen based on the preferences and individual circumstances of the parturient and anesthesiologist.

Total spinal anaesthesia following obstetric neuraxial blockade: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Total spinal anaesthesia (TSA) is an emergency caused by high neuraxial blockade. It is a recognised complication of all neuraxial techniques in obstetric anaesthesia. Its incidence and outcomes have not been evaluated. There is compelling evidence that TSA continues to be a problem in contemporary practice, having the capacity to cause significant morbidity and mortality if not recognised early and promptly treated. This review based on a literature search aims to clarify the epidemiology of TSA, summarise its pathophysiology, and identify risk factors and effective treatments. METHODS: We performed a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases using specified search terms for materials published using search terms. For each case, the type of block, the difficulty of the procedure, the dose of local anaesthetic, positivity of aspiration before and after the event, maternal outcome, Apgar score, onset of symptoms, cardiorespiratory and neurological manifestations, cardiorespiratory support employed, admission to an intensive care unit, cardiac arrest events and duration of mechanical ventilation were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 605 cases were identified, of which 51 were sufficiently detailed for analysis. Although TSA is described after all neuraxial techniques, spinal after epidural was a particular concern in recent reports. Respiratory distress was universal but apnoea was not. The onset of apnoea was variable, ranging from 1 to 180 min. Hypotension was not invariable and occurred in approximately half of cases. Multiple fatalities and neurological injuries were reported, often in under-resourced areas when providers were not skilled in airway management or when recognition and intervention were delayed. In the most recent reports good outcomes were achieved when effective treatments were rapidly provided. CONCLUSIONS: The available literature confirms that TSA remains an active clinical problem and that with prompt recognition and treatment good outcomes can be achieved. This requires anticipation and preparedness in all clinical areas where neuraxial techniques are performed.

Epinephrine vs. phenylephrine infusion for prophylaxis against maternal hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The hemodynamic effects of relatively low-dose epinephrine and phenylephrine infusions during cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were compared. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included full-term pregnant women who underwent elective cesarean delivery. After spinal anesthesia, participants received either epinephrine (0.03 mcg/kg/min) or phenylephrine (0.4 mcg/kg/min) infusion that continued until 5 min after delivery. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of the occurrence of any of hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, and/or tachycardia. Neonatal outcomes, including umbilical artery blood gas and Apgar scores, were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 98 patients in each group were analyzed, and the number of patients with the composite outcome was comparable between the epinephrine and phenylephrine groups (30/98 [31%] vs. 31/98 [32%], respectively; P = 0.877). However, the incidence of hypotension was likely lower in the epinephrine group than in the phenylephrine group (P = 0.066), and the number of hypotensive episodes per patient was lower in the epinephrine group than in the phenylephrine group. On the other hand, the incidence of tachycardia was higher in the epinephrine group than that in the phenylephrine group. The incidence of hypertension was comparable between the two groups and none of the participants developed bradycardia. Neonatal outcomes were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Epinephrine and phenylephrine infusion produced comparable maternal hemodynamics and neonatal outcomes. Epinephrine was associated with a higher incidence of maternal tachycardia and likely lower incidence of maternal hypotension than phenylephrine. IRB number: MD-245-2022. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on May 31, 2023 at clinicaltrials.gov registry, NCT05881915, URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05881915term=NCT05881915&draw=2&rank=1.

Comparative Study between Paracervical Block and Non-Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drug for Relief of Pain during Manual Vacuum Aspiration Procedure.

The incidence of first trimester pregnancy loss is around 10.0-20.0% of registered pregnancies. Manual vacuum aspiration is a safe, effective and acceptable option of treatment for patients diagnosed with first trimester pregnancy loss. Main disadvantage of MVA is the pain caused by manipulation of the cervix, the uterine suction and the cervical dilatation. This study showed the way how the pain and discomfort might be reduced. This was a cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at the obstetrics and Gynecological Department of Sadar hospital, Manikganj, Bangladesh from January 2017 to December 2017. All the consecutive women admitted and diagnosed as incomplete abortion, missed abortion and anembryonic pregnancy (blighted ovum) were included in this study. Sampling technique was purposive sampling. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of paracervical block anesthesia with non-steroidal anti inflammatory drug (NSAID) for relief of pain during the manual vacuum aspiration procedure for the treatment of first trimester pregnancy loss. Total 120 cases were included in this study. Assigned study population were divided into two groups like Group A and Group B. 60 of the study population were included in Group A who were given paracervical block anesthesia 3 minutes before the procedure. Another 60 study population was included in Group B who was given diclofenac 75mg intramuscular injection, 30 minutes before the procedure. Both intraoperative and postoperative pain level was evaluated by using visual analog scale ranged from (0-10 points) 30 minutes after the procedure. At the same time the satisfaction level of the study population were measured by 5 points lickert scale. Regarding clinical profile of the study population it showed no significant difference in case of mean age, mean gestational age and mean duration of the procedure between two groups. The mean intraoperative pain score in Group A was 4.0±1.3, in Group B it was 5.4±1.5 (p=0.001) which was significant. So it showed that paracervical block anesthesia significantly reduced the pain in relation to diclofenac 75mg intramuscular injection. Mean postoperative pain level 30 minutes after procedure in Group A was 2.2±0.4 and in Group B was 2.4±0.4 (p=0.343), where post-operative pain is lower in Group A than Group B. Though this difference is not statistically significant (p=0.343). In Group A 73.0% (n=44) and in Group B 43.0% (n=26) study population were agreed that the procedure was easy. Most common adverse effect was epigastric pain which was 1.7% (n=1) in Group A and 10.0% (n=7) in Group B. Paracervical block significantly reduces intraoperative pain during Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA) procedure in the treatment of first trimester pregnancy loss in comparison to intramuscular injection of diclofenac. In conclusion it might be mentioned that regarding paracervical block anesthesia, efficacy is higher and side effects are less. Moreover paracervical block anesthesia is cost effective.

Is crystalloid co-loading necessary to prevent spinal hypotension during elective cesarean delivery? A randomized double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypotension is common during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Preventive strategies include fluid loading and phenylephrine. We hypothesized that if prophylactic phenylephrine infusion is used, omission of fluid loading would be non-inferior to fluid co-loading in maintaining cardiac output. We assumed that if there was a difference, the increase in cardiac output would be greater in the no-loading than in the co-loading group. METHODS: Term pregnant women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 1 L crystalloid co-loading or maintenance fluids only. Phenylephrine was titrated to maintain blood pressure. Changes in cardiac output following spinal anesthesia were the primary outcome. The study was powered as a non-inferiority trial, allowing the no-loading arm to have a 50% greater change in cardiac output. Heart rate, dose of phenylephrine, occurrence of nausea and vomiting, Apgar scores and neonatal acid base status were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 63 women were analyzed. In contrast to our hypothesis, there was 33% less increase in cardiac output with no loading (ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.36), and 60% greater reduction of cardiac output with no loading (ratio 1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.7). Total dose of phenylephrine was higher in the no-loading group. There may be a less favorable neonatal acid base status without volume loading. CONCLUSION: Omission of crystalloid co-loading leads to a decrease in cardiac output which has a potentially unfavorable impact on neonatal acid base status. We conclude that crystalloid co-loading may be useful in the presence of phenylephrine infusion.

Anesthetic recommendations for maternal and fetal safety in nonobstetric surgery: a balancing act.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy is associated with maternal and fetal risks. Several physiologic changes create unique challenges for anesthesiologists. This review highlights physiologic changes of pregnancy and presents clinical recommendations based on recent literature to guide anesthetic management for the pregnant patient undergoing nonobstetric surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Nearly every anesthetic technique has been safely used in pregnant patients. Although it is difficult to eliminate confounding factors, exposure to anesthetics could endanger fetal brain development. Perioperative fetal monitoring decisions require an obstetric consult based on anticipated maternal and fetal concerns. Given the limitations of fasting guidelines, bedside gastric ultrasound is useful in assessing aspiration risk in pregnant patients. Although there is concern about appropriateness of sugammadex for neuromuscular blockade reversal due its binding to progesterone, preliminary literature supports its safety. SUMMARY: These recommendations will equip anesthesiologists to provide safe care for the pregnant patient and fetus undergoing nonobstetric surgery.

Effect of phenylephrine rescue injection on hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery when guided by both heart rate and SBP during an early warning window: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anaesthesia is now the most common technique for caesarean delivery. However, because of the intermittent nature of noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements, maternal blood pressure may become hypotensive between the measurements. There is thus an inbuilt delay before the anaesthesiologist can intervene to counteract the hypotension. Based on the principle that changes in blood pressure can induce compensatory changes in the heart rate (HR), combining the NIBP with real-time HR, we designed two warning windows to predict hypotension and hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether phenylephrine administration guided by these warning windows would help maintain haemodynamic stability. SETTING: A teaching hospital. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. PATIENTS: One hundred and ten pregnant women scheduled for elective caesarean delivery were enrolled, from which, after exclusions, 86 were eligible for the study. INTERVENTIONS: All eligible patients received a continuous intravenous infusion of phenylephrine as soon as spinal anaesthesia was initiated. Thereafter, patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In the test group (Win-Group): rescue phenylephrine administration was triggered by an early warning window of HR above 100 beats per minute (bpm) and SBP 90 to 110 mmHg; pausing the infusion phenylephrine was triggered by a HR lower than 60 bpm and SBP greater than 90 mmHg. In the control group, phenylephrine was guided by BP only when it appeared on the monitor: SBP less than 90 mmHg was the trigger for administering rescue phenylephrine; SBP greater than 110 mmHg was the trigger for pausing the phenylephrine infusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was incidence of hypotension. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of hypertension and other adverse haemodynamic events. RESULTS: The incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the Win-Group than in the BP-Group (27.8 vs. 66.7%, P  = 0.001). The minimum SBP was significantly higher in Win-Group than in BP-Group (93.9 ±â€Š9.49 vs. 86.7 ±â€Š11.16 mmHg, P   =  0.004). There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypertension between groups. CONCLUSION: After spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery, when phenylephrine infusion is guided by HR along with BP from a warning window it effectively reduces the incidence of hypotension without any significant effect on incidence of hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chictr.org.cn; Identifier: ChiCTR 2100041812.

Epidural ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for cesarean sections: a system review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: It is still no consensus on the use of ropivacaine or bupivacaine in epidural anesthesia for cesarean section (CS), because their anesthetic potency and relative complications remains controversial. This system review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of epidural ropivacaine and bupivacaine for elective CSs and investigate relative complications for parturients and neonates. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Science-Direct, and Google Scholar to June 30, 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which compared epidural ropivacaine with bupivacaine for elective CSs. The success rate of epidural anesthesia (EA) was primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included onset times of sensory block, maternal side effects, neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. RESULTS: We analyzed 8 RCTs with 532 parturients. 0.75% ropivacaine is associated with a shorter onset time of sensory block than 0.5% bupivacaine (SMD = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.17; p = .001). 0.5% ropivacaine resulted in a reduced nausea than 0.5% bupivacaine (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.83; p = .008). In addition, there were no significant difference between ropivacaine and bupivacaine groups in terms of success rate of epidural anesthesia, maternal side effects (hypotension, bradycardia, shivering), and neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there were no significant difference between epidural ropivacaine and bupivacaine for elective CSs in terms of the success rate (85.9% vs. 83.5), maternal side effects (hypotension, bradycardia, shivering), and neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. But compared with 0.5% bupivacaine, epidural 0.75% ropivacaine was mildly effective for reducing onset time of sensory block and 0.5% ropivacaine reduced the incidence of maternal nausea.

Method of Anesthesia and Perioperative Risk Factors, Maternal Anesthesia Complications, and Neonatal Mortality Following Cesarean Delivery in Africa: A Substudy of a 7-Day Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) found that maternal mortality following cesarean delivery in Africa is 50 times higher than in high-income countries, and associated with obstetric hemorrhage and anesthesia complications. Mothers who died were more likely to receive general anesthesia (GA). The associations between GA versus spinal anesthesia (SA) and preoperative risk factors, maternal anesthesia complications, and neonatal outcomes following cesarean delivery in Africa are unknown. METHODS: This is a secondary explanatory analysis of 3792 patients undergoing cesarean delivery in ASOS, a prospective observational cohort study, across 22 African countries. The primary aim was to estimate the association between preoperative risk factors and the outcome of the method of anesthesia delivered. Secondary aims were to estimate the association between the method of anesthesia and the outcomes (1) maternal intraoperative hypotension, (2) severe maternal anesthesia complications, and (3) neonatal mortality. Generalized linear mixed models adjusting for obstetric gravidity and gestation, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) category, urgency of surgery, maternal comorbidities, fetal distress, and level of anesthesia provider were used. RESULTS: Of 3709 patients, SA was performed in 2968 (80%) and GA in 741 (20%). Preoperative factors independently associated with GA for cesarean delivery were gestational age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.093; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.052-1.135), ASA categories III (aOR, 11.84; 95% CI, 2.93-46.31) and IV (aOR, 11.48; 95% CI, 2.93-44.93), eclampsia (aOR, 3.92; 95% CI, 2.18-7.06), placental abruption (aOR, 6.23; 95% CI, 3.36-11.54), and ruptured uterus (aOR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.36-9.63). SA was administered to 48 of 94 (51.1%) patients with eclampsia, 12 of 28 (42.9%) with cardiac disease, 14 of 19 (73.7%) with preoperative sepsis, 48 of 76 (63.2%) with antepartum hemorrhage, 30 of 55 (54.5%) with placenta previa, 33 of 78 (42.3%) with placental abruption, and 12 of 29 (41.4%) with a ruptured uterus. The composite maternal outcome "all anesthesia complications" was more frequent in GA than SA (9/741 [1.2%] vs 3/2968 [0.1%], P < .001). The unadjusted neonatal mortality was higher with GA than SA (65/662 [9.8%] vs 73/2669 [2.7%], P < .001). The adjusted analyses demonstrated no association between method of anesthesia and (1) intraoperative maternal hypotension and (2) neonatal mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of patients undergoing anesthesia for cesarean delivery in Africa indicated patients more likely to receive GA. Anesthesia complications and neonatal mortality were more frequent following GA. SA was often administered to high-risk patients, including those with eclampsia or obstetric hemorrhage. Training in the principles of selection of method of anesthesia, and the skills of safe GA and neonatal resuscitation, is recommended.