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.

Norepinephrine versus phenylephrine on cerebral tissue oxygen saturation during prophylactic infusion to prevent spinal hypotension for Caesarean birth.

BACKGROUND: Phenylephrine may cause a reduction in maternal cerebral tissue oxygen saturation (SctO2) during Caesarean birth to prevent spinal hypotension; however, the effect of norepinephrine has not been assessed. We hypothesized that norepinephrine was more effective than phenylephrine in maintaining SctO2 when preventing spinal hypotension during Caesarean birth. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to prophylactic norepinephrine or phenylephrine to maintain blood pressure during spinal anesthesia for Caesarean birth. SctO2, systolic blood pressure, and heart rate were recorded. The primary outcome was the incidence of a 10% reduction of intraoperative SctO2 from baseline or more during Caesarean birth. RESULTS: The norepinephrine group had a lower incidence of more than 10% reduction of intraoperative SctO2 from baseline than that of the phenylephrine group (13.3% vs 40.0%, P = .02). The change in SctO2 after 5 minutes of norepinephrine infusion was higher than that after phenylephrine infusion (-3.4 ±â€…4.7 vs -6.2 ±â€…5.6, P = .04). The change in SctO2 after 10 minutes of norepinephrine infusion was higher than that after phenylephrine infusion (-2.5 ±â€…4.4 vs -5.4 ±â€…4.6, P = .006). The norepinephrine group showed greater left- and right-SctO2 values than the phenylephrine group at 5 to 10 minutes. However, the change in systolic blood pressure was comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Norepinephrine was more effective than phenylephrine in maintaining SctO2 when preventing spinal hypotension during Caesarean birth. However, the changes in clinical outcomes caused by differences in SctO2 between the 2 medications warrant further studies.

Paracervical block before laparoscopic total hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that paracervical block with 0.5 % bupivacaine decreases postoperative pain after total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). MATERIALS AND METHOD: This randomized double-blind placebo control trial included 152 women. We injected 10 mL 0.5 % bupivacaine (study group, n = 75) or 10 mL normal saline (control group, n = 77) at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions of the uterine cervix. The primary outcome was the visual analog scale score (VAS) determined 1 h (h) postoperatively. RESULTS: The 152 patients did not differ in their baseline demographics or perioperative characteristics. The mean VAS 1 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the study group than in controls (5.7 ± 1.2 vs. 6.8 ± 1.1, P < 0.001). The average VAS at 30 min, 3 h, and 6 h postoperatively was also significantly lower in the study group. Patients in the study group had a significantly lower analgesic requirement than did controls during the first 24 h postoperatively (6 [7.8 %] vs. 16 [21 %], P = 0.021). Total QoR-40 questionnaire scores were higher in patients who received bupivacaine. CONCLUSION: Paracervical bloc with 0.5 % bupivacaine just before TLH is an effective and safe method to reduce pain and lower postoperative analgesic requirement. URL LINK THAT LEADS DIRECTLY TO THE TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05341869?cond=NCT05341869&draw=2&rank=1.

The 90% effective dose of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine for Cesarean delivery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in parturients with super obesity: an up-down sequential allocation study.

PURPOSE: To determine the 90% effective dose (ED90) of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine for Cesarean delivery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE) in parturients with super obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 50 kg·m-2). METHODS: We enrolled parturients with BMI ≥ 50 kg·m-2 with term, singleton vertex pregnancies undergoing elective Cesarean delivery under CSE. An independent statistician generated the 0.75% hyperbaric bupivacaine dosing regimen in increments of 0.75 mg using a biased-coin up-down sequential allocation technique. This was combined with 15 µg fentanyl, 150 µg morphine, and normal saline to a volume of 2.05 mL. The initial and maximum doses were 9.75 mg and 12 mg, respectively. Participants, clinical team, and outcome assessors were blinded to the dose. The primary outcome was block success, defined as T6 block to pinprick within ten minutes and no intraoperative analgesic supplementation within 90 min of spinal injection. We determined the ED90 using logistic regression. RESULTS: We enrolled 45 parturients and included 42 in the analysis. All doses achieved a T6 level within ten minutes, and the primary outcome occurred in 0/1 (0%) of the 9.75-mg doses, 2/3 (67%) of the 10.5-mg doses, 21/27 (78%) of the 11.25-mg doses, and 11/11 (100%) of the 12-mg doses. The ED90 of hyperbaric bupivacaine was 11.56 mg (95% confidence interval, 11.16 to 11.99). Four parturients (9.5%) had sensory level higher than T2, but none was symptomatic or required general anesthesia. CONCLUSION: The estimated ED90 of hyperbaric bupivacaine with fentanyl and morphine in parturients with super obesity undergoing Cesarean delivery under CSE was approximately 11.5 mg. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03781388); first submitted 18 December 2018.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Notre objectif était de déterminer la dose efficace à 90 % (DE90) de bupivacaïne hyperbare intrathécale pour l'accouchement par césarienne sous péri-rachianesthésie combinée (PRC) chez les personnes parturientes atteintes de super obésité (indice de masse corporelle [IMC] ≥ 50 kg·m−2). MéTHODE: Nous avons recruté des personnes parturientes ayant un IMC ≥ 50 kg·m−2 présentant des grossesses uniques à terme, en présentation céphalique et bénéficiant d'un accouchement par césarienne programmée sous PRC. Un·e statisticien·ne indépendant·e a généré le schéma posologique de bupivacaïne hyperbare à 0,75 % par incréments de 0,75 mg à l'aide d'une technique d'allocation séquentielle en escalier. La bupivacaïne a été combinée à 15 µg de fentanyl, 150 µg de morphine et à une solution physiologique salée jusqu'à un volume de 2,05 mL. Les doses initiale et maximale étaient respectivement de 9,75 mg et 12 mg. Les participant·es, l'équipe clinique et les personnes évaluant les résultats n'avaient pas connaissance de la dose. Le critère d'évaluation principal était la réussite du bloc, définie comme un bloc à T6 à la piqûre dans les dix minutes et aucune supplémentation analgésique peropératoire dans les 90 minutes suivant l'injection rachidienne. Nous avons déterminé la DE90 à l'aide d'une méthode de régression logistique. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recruté 45 personnes parturientes et en avons inclus 42 dans l'analyse. Toutes les doses ont atteint le niveau T6 en dix minutes, et le critère d'évaluation principal a été obtenu pour 0/1 (0 %) des doses de 9,75 mg, 2/3 (67 %) des doses de 10,5 mg, 21/27 (78 %) des doses de 11,25 mg et 11/11 (100 %) des doses de 12 mg. La DE90 de bupivacaïne hyperbare était de 11,56 mg (intervalle de confiance à 95 %, 11,16 à 11,99). Quatre personnes parturientes (9,5 %) ont affiché un niveau sensoriel supérieur à T2, mais aucune n'était symptomatique ni n'a nécessité d'anesthésie générale. CONCLUSION: La DE90 estimée de bupivacaïne hyperbare avec fentanyl et morphine chez les personnes parturientes hyperobèses bénéficiant d'une césarienne sous PRC était d'environ 11,5 mg. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03781388); soumis pour la première fois le 18 décembre 2018.

Ultrasound-guided caudal anaesthesia combined with epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Although epidural anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia are currently the general choices for patients undergoing caesarean section, these two neuraxial anaesthesia methods still have drawbacks. Caudal anaesthesia has been considered to be more appropriate for gynaecological surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia, spinal anaesthesia and single-space epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section with respect to postoperative comfort and intraoperative anaesthesia quality. METHODS: In this clinical trial, 150 patients undergoing elective caesarean section were recruited and randomized into three groups according to a ratio of 1:1:1to receive epidural anaesthesia only, spinal anaesthesia only or epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia. The primary outcome was postoperative comfort in the three groups. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative anaesthesia quality and the incidences of nausea, vomiting, postdural puncture headache, maternal bradycardia, or hypotension. RESULTS: More patients were satisfied with the intraoperative anaesthesia quality in the EAC group than in the EA group (P = 0.001). The obstetrician was more significantly satisfied with the intraoperative anaesthesia quality in the SA and EAC groups than in the EA group (P = 0.004 and 0.020, respectively). The parturients felt more comfortable after surgery in the EA and EAC groups (P = 0.007). The incidence of maternal hypotension during caesarean section was higher in the SA group than in the EA and EAC groups (P = 0.001 and 0.019, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia may be a better choice for elective caesarean section. Compared with epidural anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia, it has a higher quality of postoperative comfort and intraoperative anaesthesia.

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.

Incidence and clinical impact of aspiration during cesarean delivery: A multi-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The risk of aspiration during general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has long been thought to be increased due to factors such as increased intra-abdominal pressures and delayed gastric emptying in pregnant patients. However, recent studies have reported normal gastric emptying in pregnant patients, suggesting that the risk of aspiration may not be as high as previously believed. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 48,609 cesarean deliveries, of which 22,690 (46.7%) were performed under general anesthesia at two large tertiary medical centers in Israel. The study aimed to examine the incidence of potentially severe aspiration during cesarean delivery, both under general and neuraxial anesthesia. RESULTS: Among the patients included in the study, three were admitted to the intensive care unit due to suspected pulmonary aspiration. Two of these cases occurred during induction of general anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery associated with difficult intubation and one under deep sedation during spinal anesthesia. The incidence of aspiration during cesarean delivery during general anesthesia in our study was 1 in 11,345 patients, and the incidence of aspiration during neuraxial anesthesia was 1 in 25,929 patients. No deaths due to aspiration were reported during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide another contemporary analysis of aspiration rates in obstetric patients, highlighting increased risks during the management of difficult airways during general anesthesia and deep sedation associated with neuraxial anesthesia.

Anesthesia Liability Related to Pre-existing Conditions.

In 1985, the American Society of Anesthesiologists initiated a quality improvement closed claims analysis project for anesthetic injury to elevate patient safety. To date, there have been a total of 8954 documented claims, describing injuries contracted under sedation, regional anesthesia, or failure to attend to a patient's post-operative needs. The Closed Claims database reveals that the most highly documented health care complications were a loss of life at 2%, nerve injuries at 2%, and damage to the brain at 9%. The highest documented cases of damage from anesthesia involved regional-block-related events at 20%, followed by respiratory-related adverse effects at 17%, cardiovascular-related events at 13%, together with apparatus-linked events at 10%. Injury may result from several causes. First, multiple techniques and interventions are used during surgery, and all have potential adverse effects. Additionally, many patients scheduled for surgery have extensive past medical histories and medical comorbidities, thereby increasing their baseline risk for injury. From the Closed Claims database, improved evaluation of clinical-related implications linked to injuries within the handling of airway, sedation, non-operational room locales, obstetric anesthesia, along with chronic pain management. In summary, anesthesia departments should review outcomes of their patients on a routine basis. Assessing factors when an adverse outcome occurs may allow for changes in techniques or other anesthesia considerations to help lessen or prevent future complications.

Perinatal outcome of emergency cesarean section under neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia: a seven-year retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: An emergency cesarean section (CS), which is extremely life-threatening to the mother or fetus, seems to be performed within an adequate time horizon to avoid negative fetal-maternal denouement. An effective and vigilant technique for anesthesia remains vital for emergency cesarean delivery. Therefore, this study aimed to validate the impact of various anesthesia tactics on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort study of parturient patients who were selected for emergency CS with the assistance of general or neuraxial anesthesia between January 2015 and July 2021 at our institution. The 5-min Apgar score was documented as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes, including the 1 min Apgar score, decision-to-delivery interval (DDI), onset of anesthesia to incision interval (OAII), decision to incision interval (DII), duration of operation, length of hospitalization, height and weight of the newborn, use of vasopressors, blood loss, neonatal resuscitation rate, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), duration of NICU and complications, were also measured. RESULTS: Of the 539 patients included in the analysis, 337 CSs were performed under general anesthesia (GA), 137 under epidural anesthesia (EA) and 65 under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA). The Apgar scores at 1 min and 5 min in newborns receiving GA were lower than those receiving intraspinal anesthesia, and no difference was found between those receiving EA and those receiving CSEA. The DDI of parturients under GA, EA, and CSE were 7[6,7], 6[6,7], and 14[11.5,20.5], respectively. The DDI and DII of GA and EA were shorter than those of CSE, and the DDI and DII were similar between GA and EA. Compared to that in the GA group, the OAII in the intraspinal anesthesia group was significantly greater. GA administration correlated with more frequent resuscitative interventions, increased admission rates to NICU, and a greater incidence of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS). Nevertheless, the duration of NICU stay and the incidence rates of neonatal hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) and pneumonia did not significantly differ based on the type of anesthesia performed. CONCLUSION: Compared with general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia may not be associated with a negative impact on neonatal or maternal outcomes and could be utilized as an alternative to general anesthesia in our selected patient population following emergency cesarean section; In addition, a comparably short DDI was achieved for emergency cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia when compared to general anesthesia in our study. However, the possibility that selection bias related to the retrospective study design may have influenced the results cannot be excluded.

Changes in the corrected carotid flow time can predict spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension in patients undergoing cesarean delivery: an observational study.

PURPOSE: Spinal anesthesia is a standard technique for cesarean delivery; however, it possesses a risk of hypotension. We hypothesised that the changes in the corrected flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position could predict the incidence of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled. Before anesthesia induction, corrected flow time was measured in the supine and Trendelenburg positions (FTc-1 and FTc-2, respectively). Additionally, a percent change in corrected flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position was defined as ΔFTc. The primary endpoint was to investigate the ability of ΔFTc to predict the incidence of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension until delivery. The receiver operating characteristics curves to assess the ability of FTc-1, FTc-2, and ΔFTc to predict the incidence of hypotension were generated. RESULTS: Finally, 40 patients were included, and of those, 26 (65%) developed spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension. The areas under the curve for FTc-1, FTc-2, and ΔFTc were 0.591 (95% CI: 0.424 to 0.743) (P = 0.380), 0.742 (95% CI: 0.579 to 0.867) (P = 0.004), and 0.882 (95% CI: 0.740 to 0.962) (P < 0.001) respectively, indicating ΔFTc as the best predictor among these three parameters. The best threshold for ΔFTc was 6.4% (sensitivity: 80.8% (95% CI: 53.8 to 96.2), specificity: 85.7% (95% CI: 42.9 to 100.0)). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that changes in the corrected carotid flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position could serve as a good predictor of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension for cesarean delivery.

Cardiac arrest in obstetric patients receiving anaesthetic care: results from the 7th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists.

The 7th National Audit Project (NAP7) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists studied peri-operative cardiac arrest. Additional inclusion criteria for obstetric anaesthesia were: cardiac arrest associated with neuraxial block performed by an anaesthetist outside the operating theatre (labour epidural analgesia); and cardiac arrest associated with remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia. There were 28 cases of cardiac arrest in obstetric patients, representing 3% of all cardiac arrests reported to NAP7, giving an incidence of 7.9 per 100,000 (95%CI 5.4-11.4 per 100,000). Obstetric patients were approximately four times less likely to have a cardiac arrest during anaesthesia care than patients having non-obstetric surgery. The single leading cause of peri-operative cardiac arrest in obstetric patients was haemorrhage, with underestimated severity and inadequate early resuscitation being contributory factors. When taken together, anaesthetic causes, high neuraxial block and bradyarrhythmia associated with spinal anaesthesia were the leading causes overall. Two patients had a cardiac arrest related to labour neuraxial analgesia. There were no cardiac arrests related to failed airway management or remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia.

The Incidence and Predictors of Failed Spinal Anesthesia After Intrathecal Injection of Local Anesthetic for Cesarean Delivery: A Single-Center, 9-Year Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of failed spinal anesthesia varies widely in the obstetric literature. Although many risk factors have been suggested, their relative predictive value is unknown. The primary objective of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the incidence of failed spinal anesthesia for cesarean deliveries at a tertiary care obstetric hospital, and its secondary objectives were to identify predictors of failed spinal anesthesia in the obstetrics population and quantify their relative importance in a predictive model for failure. METHODS: With local institutional ethics committee approval, a retrospective review of our hospital database identified the incidence of failed spinal anesthesia for 5361 cesarean deliveries between 2010 and 2019. We performed a multivariable analysis to assess the association of predictors with failure and a dominance analysis to assess the importance of each predictor. RESULTS: The incidence of failed spinal anesthesia requiring an alternative anesthetic was 2.1%, with conversion to general anesthesia occurring in 0.7% of surgeries. Supplemental analgesia or sedation was provided to an additional 2.0% of women. The most important predictors of a failed spinal anesthetic were previous cesarean delivery (odds ratio [OR], 11.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.09-18.20; P < .001), concomitant tubal ligation (OR, 8.23; 95% CI, 3.12-19.20; P < .001), lower body mass index (BMI) (kg·m -2 , OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98; P = .005), and longer surgery duration (minutes, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .006). Previous cesarean delivery was the most significant risk factor, contributing to 9.6% of the total 17% variance predicted by all predictors examined. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia failed to provide a pain-free surgery in 4.1% of our cesarean deliveries. Previous cesarean delivery was the most important predictor of spinal failure. Other important predictors included tubal ligation, lower BMI, and longer surgery duration.