Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Perinatol ; 2023 Feb 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36603831

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Three primary neuraxial techniques reduce labor pain: epidural, dural puncture epidural (DPE), and combined spinal-epidural (CSE). This study aims to determine whether neuraxial analgesia techniques changed after the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Given that a dural puncture confirms neuraxial placement, we hypothesized that DPE was more frequent in women with concerns for COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center retrospective cohort study comparing neuraxial analgesia techniques for labor and delivery pain management before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) at a maternity hospital in Dallas, Texas, with a large delivery service. Statistical analyses included the Chi-square test for categorical and Kruskal-Wallis test for nonparametric ordinal comparisons. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to assess the association between neuraxial technique and accidental dural puncture or postdural puncture headache. RESULTS: Of 10,971 patients who received neuraxial analgesia for labor, 5,528 were delivered in 2019 and 5,443 in 2020. Epidural analgesia was the most common neuraxial technique for labor pain in 2019 and 2020. There was no difference in the frequency of neuraxial analgesia techniques or the rates of accidental dural puncture or postdural puncture headaches comparing all deliveries in 2019 to 2020. Despite a significant increase in DPEs relative to epidurals in the SARS-CoV-2-positive group compared with the SARS-CoV-2-negative group in 2020, there was no significant difference in postdural puncture headaches or accidental dural punctures. CONCLUSION: The advantages of a DPE, specifically the ability to confirm epidural placement using a small gauge spinal needle, likely led to an increase in the placement of this neuraxial in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. There was no effect on the frequency of postdural puncture headaches or accidental dural punctures within the same period. KEY POINTS: · Epidural analgesia was the most common neuraxial technique for labor pain management.. · Dural puncture epidural placements increased in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients.. · Rates of postdural puncture headaches and accidental dural puncture after neuraxial placement did not change..

2.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 4(2): 100573, 2022 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35038612

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states that the current data are insufficient to recommend tranexamic acid prophylaxis for postpartum hemorrhage. OBJECTIVE: This study's objective was to evaluate if prophylactic tranexamic acid treatment reduces the calculated blood loss when compared with a placebo in women undergoing an elective repeat cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in which the calculated blood loss was determined after administration of prophylactic doses of 1 g of tranexamic acid before skin incision and after placental delivery and standard uterotonics in women with singleton pregnancies at ≥37 weeks' gestation presenting for their second or third cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia. The primary outcome was calculated blood loss at 24 hours. The calculation was based on each participant's height, weight, and the difference in hematocrit before the start of surgery and 24 hours after delivery. Prespecified secondary outcomes were quantification of maternal coagulation activity during the perioperative course. A sample size of 50 women per group was planned (N=100) based on a meta-analysis of mean reduction in blood loss after tranexamic acid. RESULTS: A total of 723 women were screened, and 110 women were randomized as follows: 55 to the tranexamic acid group and 55 to the placebo group. The primary outcome of mean calculated blood loss was 2274±469 mL for the tranexamic acid group and 2407±388 mL for the placebo group (P>.05). For the secondary outcomes, D-dimer levels were lower in the tranexamic acid group than in the placebo group 24 hours after delivery (2.1±1.2 µg/mL vs 4.3±2.4 µg/mL; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic tranexamic acid treatment did not decrease the mean calculated blood loss. Significantly less participants had a calculated blood loss >2000 mL in the tranexamic acid group than in the placebo group and had lower levels of D-dimer at 24 hours.


Assuntos
Antifibrinolíticos , Hemorragia Pós-Parto , Ácido Tranexâmico , Antifibrinolíticos/uso terapêutico , Cesárea/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Placenta , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/etiologia , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/prevenção & controle , Gravidez , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Ácido Tranexâmico/uso terapêutico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa