Strategies for prevention of spinal-associated hypotension during Cesarean delivery: Are we paying attention?

The Prophylactic Effect of Acetaminophen and Caffeine on Post Dural Puncture Headache after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Background

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is the most common complication following spinal anesthesia among parturients undergoing cesarean section surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of acetaminophen and caffeine in preventing PDPH.

Methods

This double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted on 96 obstetric women, who were candidates for elective cesarean section. Following the randomization of participants into two groups, participants in the intervention group received tablets of acetaminophen (500 mg)+caffeine (65 mg), and participants in the control group received placebo tablets orally 2 hours before spinal anesthesia induction and then every 6 hours after surgery up to 24 hours. All parturients were evaluated for frequency and intensity of PDPH every 6 hours until 24 hours after surgery and then 48 and 72 hours after surgery. Overall satisfaction during the first 72 hours of postpartum was evaluated. The data were analyzed using SPSS software. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Participants in the intervention group were 70% less likely to experience PDPH after spinal anesthesia (OR=0.31 P=0.01, 95% CI [0.12-0.77]). They also experienced significantly milder headaches 18 hours, 48 hours, and 72 hours later. Participants in the intervention group reported higher levels of satisfaction at the end of the study (P=0.01). No side effects related to the intervention were reported.

Conclusion

Prophylactic administration of acetaminophen+caffeine decreases 70% the risk of PDPH and significantly attenuates pain intensity in obstetric patients who underwent spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.

Post-cesarean Delivery Analgesia Using Spinal Anesthesia: Ropivacaine-Fentanyl vs. Ropivacaine-Sufentanil

Background

To improve the quality of intraoperative and postoperative analgesia during spinal anesthesia, intrathecal opioids are used as adjuvant drugs in combination with local anesthetics.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the intrathecal injection of ropivacaine-fentanyl with ropivacaine-sufentanil in terms of the duration of analgesia after cesarean section (CS).

Methods

This randomized, double-blind clinical trial study was conducted on women referred to Imam Khomeini Hospital of Ahvaz City for elective CS in 2021. A total of 51 patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. The first group (n = 25) received ropivacaine (17.5 mg) + fentanyl (25 μg), while the second group (n = 26) received ropivacaine (17.5 mg) + sufentanil (2.5 μg) for spinal anesthesia. Eventually, several parameters were investigated, including the duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia (based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)), hemodynamic parameters, and possible complications.

Results

The duration of surgery (P = 0.059) and the duration of motor block (P = 0.962) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The mean duration of analgesia (from the time of entering recovery to reaching VAS = 3) was 203.12 ± 72.93 and 207.46 ± 69.59 minutes in the fentanyl and sufentanil groups, respectively (P = 0.658). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) drops in minute 5 were observed more frequently in the sufentanil group than in the fentanyl group (P = 0.027 and P = 0.002, respectively). At the other time points, however, no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of hemodynamic variables (P > 0.05). Finally, the frequency of pruritus was higher in the sufentanil group than in the fentanyl group (26.9% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.024).

Conclusions

Adding fentanyl or sufentanil to intrathecal ropivacaine provides a similar duration of analgesia. However, fentanyl was associated with better hemodynamic stability and a lower incidence of pruritus.

Spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section. Bupivacaine associated with different doses of fentanyl: randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Assess patients submitted to elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, and the efficacy of different doses of fentanyl associated with bupivacaine.

METHODS

The study included 124 pregnant women randomly distributed into 4 groups (n = 31) according to different doses of fentanyl (15 μg, 10 μg, 7.5 μg), Groups I, II, and III, respectively, and control group IV, associated with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (10 mg). An epidural catheter was inserted in case epidural top-up was required. We assessed the anesthetic blockage characteristics, negative maternal and neonatal outcomes, and maternal side effects. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis, Fisher's exact and chi-square tests. The level of significance was 5% (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The quality of analgesia, time for the first complaint of pain and motor block recovery time were significantly better for groups that received fentanyl in comparison to controls (p < 0.001). None of the groups had negative maternal-fetal outcomes. Nausea was significantly more frequent in patients in Groups II (10 µg) and III (7.5 µg) when compared to Groups I (15 µg) and IV (no fentanyl). Vomiting was more frequent in Group III than in Group I (p = 0.006). The incidence of pruritus was significantly higher in the groups receiving fentanyl (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the solutions studied, the spinal anesthesia technique using 15 µg of fentanyl associated with 10 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine provided satisfactory analgesia and very low incidence of adverse effects for patients submitted to cesarean section.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UTN U1111-1199-0285.

REBEC

RBR-5XWT6T.

Anesthetic planning and management for a caesarian section in a pregnant woman affected by SARS-COV-2 pneumonía

Las mujeres embarazadas experimentan cambios fisiológicos e inmunológicos que les hacen más susceptibles a infecciones víricas o bacterianas, por lo que se les ha considerado grupo vulnerable frente al SARS-CoV-2. Así mismo, pueden desarrollar una forma grave de la enfermedad que requiera finalizar la gestación para mejorar la situación respiratoria o para salvaguardar el bienestar fetal que puede verse afectado por el estado crítico de la madre. En este contexto, cualquier intervención demanda una minuciosa planificación por parte del equipo quirúrgico en general y del anestesiólogo en particular tanto para asegurar el bienestar maternofetal como para evitar posibles contagios del personal sanitario. Describimos el caso de una gestante de 37 semanas ingresada en la Unidad de Reanimación con soporte ventilatorio mediante alto flujo por insuficiencia respiratoria severa debida a COVID-19 que precisa ser sometida a cesárea urgente.

[Recommendations for local-regional anesthesia during the COVID-19 pandemic]

Desde o início da pandemia de COVID‐19, muitas questões surgiram referentes à segurança do manejo anestésico de pacientes acometidos pela doença. A anestesia regional, seja esta periférica ou neuroaxial, é alternativa segura no manejo do paciente COVID‐19, desde que o emprego de modalidades que minimizam o comprometimento da função pulmonar seja escolhido. A adoção dessa técnica anestésica minimiza os efeitos adversos no pós‐operatório e oferece segurança para o paciente e equipe, desde que sejam respeitados os cuidados com proteção individual e de contágio interpessoal. Respeito às contraindicações e emprego criterioso das técnicas e normas de segurança são fundamentais. Este manuscrito tem por objetivo revisar as evidências disponíveis sobre anestesia regional em pacientes com COVID‐19 e oferecer recomendações práticas para sua realização segura e eficiente.

Recommendations for local-regional anesthesia during the COVID-19 pandemic

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many questions have come up regarding safe anesthesia management of patients with the disease. Regional anesthesia, whether peripheral nerve or neuraxial, is a safe alternative for managing patients with COVID-19, by choosing modalities that mitigate pulmonary function involvement. Adopting regional anesthesia mitigates adverse effects in the post-operative period and provides safety to patients and teams, as long as there is compliance with individual protection and interpersonal transmission care measures. Respecting contra-indications and judicial use of safety techniques and norms are essential. The present manuscript aims to review the evidence available on regional anesthesia for patients with COVID-19 and offer practical recommendations for safe and efficient performance.

Neuraxial anaesthesia and peripheral nerve blocks during the COVID-19 pandemic: a literature review and practice recommendations

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has had a significant impact on global healthcare services. In an attempt to limit the spread of infection and to preserve healthcare resources, one commonly used strategy has been to postpone elective surgery, whilst maintaining the provision of anaesthetic care for urgent and emergency surgery. General anaesthesia with airway intervention leads to aerosol generation, which increases the risk of COVID‐19 contamination in operating rooms and significantly exposes the healthcare teams to COVID‐19 infection during both tracheal intubation and extubation. Therefore, the provision of regional anaesthesia may be key during this pandemic, as it may reduce the need for general anaesthesia and the associated risk from aerosol‐generating procedures. However, guidelines on the safe performance of regional anaesthesia in light of the COVID‐19 pandemic are limited. The goal of this review is to provide up‐to‐date, evidence‐based recommendations or expert opinion when evidence is limited, for performing regional anaesthesia procedures in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID‐19 infection. These recommendations focus on seven specific domains including: planning of resources and staffing; modifying the clinical environment; preparing equipment, supplies and drugs; selecting appropriate personal protective equipment; providing adequate oxygen therapy; assessing for and safely performing regional anaesthesia procedures; and monitoring during the conduct of anaesthesia and post‐anaesthetic care. Implicit in these recommendations is preserving patient safety whilst protecting healthcare providers from possible exposure.

The effects of uterine size with or without abdominal obesity on spinal block level and vasopressor requirement in elective cesarean section: a prospective observational study

Background/aim

Hypotension is a serious complication caused by spinal anesthesia that places both the mother and fetus at increased risk. We aimed to investigate the effects of uterine size with or without abdominal obesity on sensory block level of pregnant women receiving spinal anesthesia.

Materials and methods

This study included 125 term parturients who underwent cesarean section. Motor and sensory block characteristics, the distance between the symphysis pubis and the fundus (SPF), the distance between the symphysis pubis and the xiphoid (SPX), newborn and placental weights, adverse effects, and doses of ephedrine were recorded.

Results

Sensory block level and ephedrine dose were significantly correlated with the SPX and the combined newborn and placenta weights (P < 0.05). The incidence of hypotension was related to the SPX and the combined newborn and placenta weight (P < 0.05). There was no correlation between the SPF and sensory block level or ephedrine dose. The sensory block level was higher for patients who had greater SPX values and higher combined newborn and placenta weights. The incidence of hypotension and the ephedrine dose were also higher in these subjects.

Conclusion

SPX values and combined newborn and placenta weights are more predictive of sensory block level than SPF values in parturients receiving spinal anesthesia.