Low-dose sequential combined spinal-epidural: an anaesthetic technique for caesarean section in patients with significant cardiac disease

Preeclamptic heart failure - perioperative concerns and management: a narrative review

Preeclampsia is an important cause of heart failure during pregnancy and the postpartum period. The aim of this review is to elucidate the pathophysiology and clinical features of preeclamptic heart failure and describe the medical and anesthetic management of these high-risk parturients. This article reviews the current evidence base regarding preeclamptic heart failure and its pathophysiology, types, and clinical features. We also describe the medical and anesthetic management of these patients during the peripartum period. Heart failure due to preeclampsia can present as either systolic or diastolic dysfunction. The management strategies of systolic heart failure include dietary salt restriction, diuresis, and cautious use of beta-blockers and vasodilators. Diuretics are the mainstay in the treatment of diastolic heart failure. In the absence of obstetric indications, vaginal delivery is the safest mode of delivery in these high-risk patients, and the use of an early labor epidural for analgesia is recommended. These patients would require increased invasive monitoring during labor and vaginal delivery. Neuraxial and general anesthesia have been used successfully for cesarean section in these patients but require crucial modifications of the standard technique. Uterotonic drugs have significant cardiovascular and pulmonary effects, and a clear understanding of these is essential during the management of these patients. Preeclamptics with heart failure require individualized peripartum care, as cardiac decompensation is an important risk factor for maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. These high-risk parturients benefit from timely multidisciplinary team inputs and collaborated management.

Neuraxial Anesthesia in Patients With Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review

Neuraxial anesthesia (NA) has been contraindicated in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) due to concerns of sympathetic blockade and hemodynamic instability. These considerations are based on precautionary expert recommendations, supported by expected physiologic effects, but in the absence of any published scientific evidence. In light of the increasing elderly population and the prevalence of AS, this systematic review compiles available literature on NA in patients with AS to address the understanding of the anesthetic practice and safety in this population. Using a systematic approach, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies of patients with AS who exclusively received NA. Primary outcomes included intraoperative and postoperative complications. Of 1,433 citations, 61 met full-text inclusion criteria, including 3,228 patients undergoing noncardiac (n = 3,146, 97.5%), obstetric (n = 69, 2.1%), and cardiac (n = 13, 0.4%) procedures. Significant data heterogeneity (local anesthetic dosing, intraoperative interventions, and measured outcomes) prevented formal metanalysis, but descriptive data are presented. Spinal block (n = 2,856, 88.5%) and epidural anesthesia (n = 397, 12.3%) were administered most frequently. Hypotension requiring vasopressors was the most common intraoperative complication-noncardiac (n = 16, 9.9%), obstetric (n = 6, 13.0%), and cardiac (n = 1, 7.7%)-with resolution in all patients and no reported intraoperative cardiovascular collapse or mortality. The relative risk of different AS severities remains unclear, and optimal medication dosing remains elusive. The authors' data suggested that NA may not be contraindicated in carefully selected patients with AS. The authors' results should inform the design of future prospective studies comparing NA and general anesthesia in patients with AS.

Care for the Obstetric Patient with Complex Cardiac Disease

The prevalence of cardiac disease-related maternal morbidity and mortality is on the rise in the United States. To ensure safe management of pregnancy in patients with cardiovascular disease, pre-delivery evaluation by a multidisciplinary Pregnancy Heart Team should occur. Appropriate anesthetic, cardiac, and obstetric care are essential. Risk stratification tools evaluate the etiology and severity of cardiovascular disease to determine the appropriate hospital type and location for delivery and anesthetic management. Intrapartum hemodynamic monitoring may need to be intensified, and neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia are generally appropriate. The anesthesiologist must be prepared for obstetric and cardiac emergencies.

Anesthetic Care of the Pregnant Patient With Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The pregnancy-related mortality rate in the United States is excessively high. The American Heart Association is dedicated to fighting heart disease and recognizes that cardiovascular disease, preexisting or acquired during pregnancy, is the leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States. Comprehensive scientific statements from cardiology and obstetrics experts guide the treatment of cardio-obstetric patients before, during, and after pregnancy. This scientific statement aims to highlight the role of specialized cardio-obstetric anesthesiology care, presenting a systematic approach to the care of these patients from the anesthesiology perspective. The anesthesiologist is a critical part of the pregnancy heart team as the perioperative physician who is trained to prevent or promptly recognize and treat patients with peripartum cardiovascular decompensation. Maternal morbidity is attenuated with expert anesthesiology peripartum care, which includes the management of neuraxial anesthesia, inotrope and vasopressor support, transthoracic echocardiography, optimization of delivery location, and consideration of advanced critical care and mechanical support when needed. Standardizing the anesthesiology approach to patients with high peripartum cardiovascular risk and ensuring that cardio-obstetrics patients have access to the appropriate care team, facilities, and advanced cardiovascular therapies will contribute to improving peripartum morbidity and mortality.

Peripartum anesthetic management in patients with left ventricular noncompaction: a case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

This retrospective review focuses on peripartum anesthetic management and outcome of a series of five pregnant women with left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC).

METHODS

The Mayo Clinic Advanced Cohort Explorer medical database was utilized to identify women diagnosed with LVNC who had been admitted for delivery at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota between January 2001 and September 2021. Echocardiograms were independently reviewed by two board-certified echocardiographers, and those determined by both to meet the Jenni criteria and/or having compatible findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were included. Electronic medical records were reviewed for information pertaining to cardiac function, labor, delivery, and postpartum management.

RESULTS

We identified 44 patients whose medical record included the term "noncompaction" or "hypertrabeculation" and who had delivered at our institution during the study period. Upon detailed review of the medical records, 36 did not meet criteria for LVNC, and three additional patients did not receive the diagnosis until after delivery, leaving five patients with confirmed LVNC who had undergone six deliveries during the study interval. All five patients had a history of arrhythmias or had developed arrhythmias during pregnancy. One patient underwent emergency cesarean delivery due to sustained ventricular tachycardia requiring three intra-operative cardioversions.

CONCLUSIONS

This case series adds new evidence to that already available about pregnancies among women with LVNC. Favorable obstetrical outcomes were achievable when multidisciplinary teams were prepared to manage the maternal and fetal consequences of intrapartum cardiac arrhythmias and hemodynamic instability.

Low-dose spinal block combined with epidural volume extension in a high-risk cardiac patient: A case-based systematic literature review

Background:

Anesthetic management of patients with severe cardiac disease can be challenging during prolonged surgical procedures. Thus, alternative neuraxial anesthetic techniques have been described to avoid general anesthesia in these patients.

Methods:

A case-based systematic literature review on low-dose spinal block combined with different methods of epidural block extension in high-risk cardiac patients was performed.

Results:

We describe the successful management of a patient with poor left ventricular function who underwent excision arthroplasty of an infected hip prosthesis under low-dose spinal block with levobupivacaine 5 mg and fentanyl 15 μg combined with saline epidural volume extension (EVE). Epidural ropivacaine 0.75% was administered as a bolus of 5 ml followed by an infusion at 5 ml/h later during the course of surgery.

Conclusions:

Although continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) or epidural anesthesia may limit hemodynamic instability, the possibility of devastating central nervous system infection may prevent CSA use, and epidural block alone may be less reliable than CSA. Epidural block alone may require large volumes of concentrated local anesthetic to obtain sacral block, which may produce hemodynamic instability. The EVE, particularly using saline EVE, has rarely been described in high-risk cardiac patients as an alternative to CSA or epidural block alone, with the intention to avoid general anesthesia, but it has demonstrated efficacy and a low rate of complications. Hemodynamic stability was maintained in most cases.

Obstetric Anesthesia and Heart Disease: Practical Clinical Considerations

Maternal morbidity and mortality as a result of cardiac disease is increasing in the United States. Safe management of pregnancy in women with heart disease requires appropriate anesthetic, cardiac, and obstetric care. The anesthesiologist should risk stratify pregnant patients based upon cardiac disease etiology and severity in order to determine the appropriate type of hospital and location within the hospital for delivery and anesthetic management. Increased intrapartum hemodynamic monitoring may be necessary and neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia is typically appropriate. The anesthesiologist should anticipate obstetric and cardiac emergencies such as emergency cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and peripartum arrhythmias. This clinical review answers practical questions for the obstetric anesthesiologist and the nonsubspecialist anesthesiologist who regularly practices obstetric anesthesiology.

Team-Based Care of Women With Cardiovascular Disease From Pre-Conception Through Pregnancy and Postpartum: JACC Focus Seminar 1/5

The specialty of cardio-obstetrics has emerged in response to the rising rates of maternal morbidity and mortality related to cardiovascular disease (CVD) during pregnancy. Women of childbearing age with or at risk for CVD should receive appropriate counseling regarding maternal and fetal risks of pregnancy, medical optimization, and contraception advice. A multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics team should ensure appropriate monitoring during pregnancy, plan for labor and delivery, and ensure close follow-up during the postpartum period when CVD complications remain common. The hemodynamic changes throughout pregnancy and during labor and delivery should be considered with respect to the individual cardiac disease of the patient. The fourth trimester refers to the 12 weeks after delivery and is a key time to address contraception, mental health, cardiovascular risk factors, and identify any potential postpartum complications. Women with adverse pregnancy outcomes are at increased risk of long-term CVD and should receive appropriate education and longitudinal follow-up.

Clinical utility of epidural volume extension following reduced intrathecal doses: a randomized controlled trial

Background and objectives

Epidural Volume Extension (EVE) involves instillation of normal saline into the epidural space soon after an intrathecal injection, with the aim to augment the sensory block height. Its clinical relevance lies in the possibility of using reduced intrathecal dose and yet achieving the desired sensory block level. Intrathecal dose is a known determinant of the level of sensory block. Whether EVE is dependent on intrathecal dose is not known.

Methods

We conducted a randomized, controlled, double-blind study to compare the maximum sensory level (S_max) achieved with or without application of EVE to two different reduced intrathecal doses. Eighty four adult male patients of ASA status I or II with body weight between 50–70 kg and height in the range of 150–180 cm, scheduled for orthopedic lower limb surgery using combined spinal epidural anesthesia were randomized to receive, either intrathecal dose (5 or 8 mg) with or without EVE, in accordance to group allocation.

Results

S_max was lowered by application of EVE to 5 mg intrathecal bupivacaine (T_8.9 ± 4.3 vs. T_6.4 ± 1.9 with and without EVE respectively; p = 0.030). S_max was similar when EVE was applied to 8 mg intrathecal bupivacaine than without it (T_5.8 ± 1.8 vs. T_6.4 ± 2.2 respectively; p =  0.324).

Conclusion

EVE should not be applied to 5 mg plain bupivacaine during a combined spinal epidural block in patients undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgery as it may result in a decrease in the maximum sensory level.

Combined spinal-epidural versus spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Single-shot spinal anaesthesia (SSS) and combined spinal-epidural (CSE) anaesthesia are both commonly used for caesarean section anaesthesia. Spinals offer technical simplicity and rapid onset of nerve blockade which can be associated with hypotension. CSE anaesthesia allows for more gradual onset and also prolongation of the anaesthesia through use of a catheter.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and adverse effects of CSE anaesthesia to single-shot spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies (search date: 8 August 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving a comparison of CSE anaesthesia with single-shot spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. We further subgrouped spinal anaesthesia as either high-dose (10 or more mg bupivacaine), or low-dose (less than 10 mg bupivacaine).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risks of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 18 trials including 1272 women, but almost all comparisons for individual outcomes involved relatively small numbers of women. Two trials did not report on this review's outcomes and therefore contribute no data towards this review. Trials were conducted in national or university hospitals in Australia (1), Croatia (1), India (1), Italy (1), Singapore (3), South Korea (4), Spain (1), Sweden (1), Turkey (2), UK (1), USA (2). The trials were at a moderate risk of bias overall.CSE versus high-dose spinal anaesthesiaThere may be little or no difference between the CSE and high-dose spinal groups for the number of women requiring a repeat regional block or general anaesthetic as a result of failure to establish adequate initial blockade (risk ratio (RR) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 1.97; 7 studies, 341 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether having CSE or spinal makes any difference in the number of women requiring supplemental intra-operative analgesia at any time after CSE or spinal anaesthetic insertion (average RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.43; 7 studies, 390 women; very low-quality evidence), or the number of women requiring intra-operative conversion to general anaesthesia (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.95; 7 studies, 388 women; very low-quality evidence). We are also uncertain about the results for the number of women who were satisfied with anaesthesia, regardless of whether they received CSE or high-dose spinal (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.73 to 1.19; 2 studies, 72 women; very low-quality evidence). More women in the CSE group (13/21) experienced intra-operative nausea or vomiting requiring treatment than in the high-dose spinal group (6/21). There were 11 cases of post-dural puncture headache (5/56 with CSE versus 6/57 with SSS; 3 trials, 113 women) with no clear difference between groups. There was also no clear difference in intra-operative hypotension requiring treatment (46/86 with CSE versus 41/76 with SSS; 4 trials, 162 women). There were no babies with Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (4 trials, 182 babies).CSE versus low-dose spinal anaesthesiaThere may be little or no difference between the CSE and low-dose spinal groups for the number of women requiring a repeat regional block or general anaesthetic as a result of failure to establish adequate initial blockade (RR 4.81, 95% CI 0.24 to 97.90; 3 studies, 224 women; low-quality evidence). Similarly, there is probably little difference in the number of women requiring supplemental intra-operative analgesia at any time after CSE or low-dose spinal anaesthetic insertion (RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.92; 4 studies, 298 women; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of CSE or low-dose spinal on the need for intra-operative conversion to general anaesthesia, because this was not required by any of the 222 women in the three trials (low-quality evidence). None of the studies examined whether women were satisfied with their anaesthesia.The mean time to effective anaesthesia was faster in women who received low-dose spinal compared to CSE, although it is unlikely that the magnitude of this difference is clinically meaningful (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.85 minutes, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.18 minutes; 2 studies, 160 women).CSE appeared to reduce the incidence of intra-operative hypotension requiring treatment compared with low-dose spinal (average RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.93; 4 studies, 336 women). Similar numbers of women between the CSE and low-dose spinal groups experienced intra-operative nausea or vomiting requiring treatment (3/50 with CSE versus 6/50 with SSS; 1 study, 100 women), and there were no cases of post-dural puncture headache (1 study, 138 women). No infants in either group had an Apgar score of less than seven at five minutes (1 study; 60 babies).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review, the number of studies and participants for most of our analyses were small and some of the included trials had design limitations. There was some suggestion that, compared to spinal anaesthesia, CSE could be associated with a reduction in the number of women with intra-operative hypotension, but an increase in intra-operative nausea and vomiting requiring treatment. One small study found that low-dose spinal resulted in a faster time to effective anaesthesia compared to CSE. However, these results are based on limited data and the difference is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Consequently, there is currently insufficient evidence in support of one technique over the other and more evidence is needed in order to further evaluate the relative effectiveness and safety of CSE and spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.More high-quality, sufficiently-powered studies in this area are needed. Such studies could consider using the outcomes listed in this review and should also consider reporting economic aspects of the different methods under investigation.

Anesthetic management for cesarean delivery in a patient with uncorrected pulmonary atresia, ventricular septal defect and major aortopulmonary collateral arteries

Pulmonary atresia witha ventricular septal defect and major aortopulmonary collateral arteries is an extremely rare congenital disorder characterized by a high risk of maternal mortality. We present the case of a 24-year-old primigravid woman with uncorrected pulmonary atresia, ventricular septal defect and major aortopulmonary collateral arterieswho presented at 35+5 weeks' gestation. Based on the pathophysiology of the congenital cardiac lesion, cesarean delivery was performed under epidural anesthesia under management by a multidisciplinary team. This report highlights the anesthesia management of a rare uncorrected congenital cardiac lesion for cesarean delivery.

Anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: case reports and review

Heart disease is a leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity. Pregnant women with structural, conduction or degenerative cardiac disease who require rhythm control or who are at high risk of sudden cardiac death may carry a cardiac implantable electronic device or may occasionally require the insertion of one during their pregnancy. These women are now encountered more frequently in clinical practice, and it is essential that a multidisciplinary approach, beginning from the early antenatal phase, be adopted in their counselling and management. Contemporary cardiac rhythm control devices are a constantly evolving technology with increasingly sophisticated features; anaesthetists should therefore have an adequate understanding of the principles of their operation and the special considerations for their use, in order to enable their safe management in the peripartum period. Of particular importance is the potential adverse effect of electromagnetic interference, which may cause device malfunction or damage, and the precautions required to reduce this risk. The ultimate goal in the management of this patient subgroup is to minimise the disruption to cardiovascular physiology that may occur near the time of labour and delivery and to control the factors that impact on device integrity and function. We present the ante- and peripartum management of two pregnant women with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, followed by a review and update of the anaesthetic management of parturients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

Anesthetic management of cesarean delivery in parturients with ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm: CARE-compliant 2 case reports and literature review

RATIONALE

Ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm is rare and dangerous in parturients. Few cases of ruptured SVA in pregnancy are reported, and the anesthetic management for cesarean delivery has scarcely been described.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A parturient at 37-week gestation complained of a sore throat and cough that started 3 days before admission, followed 1 day later by fever, dizziness, breathlessness, and palpitation on exertion. Case two at 36-week gestation complained of a 1-day history of bloating in the lower abdomen.

DIAGNOSES

Full term and preterm parturients with ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm.

INTERVENTIONS

Cesarean deliveries were performed with incremental epidural anesthesia technique under invasive monitoring. Surgical correction of the ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysms and ventricular septal defect were performed uneventfully 13 days and 7 days postpartum, respectively, for the 2 cases.

OUTCOMES

No complications were observed in the intra- or postoperative period for both mothers and babies.

LESSONS

We reviewed the pertinent literature and reached the following conclusions: use of a multidisciplinary team to guide anesthetic management is helpful and necessary; and both general anesthesia and incremental epidural anesthesia can be safely used in parturients with ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm.

Anesthetic Management of Parturients With a Fontan Circulation

Parturients with Fontan physiology provide unique and complex challenges to anesthesiologists. Such challenges include the maintenance of a perfect balance between preload, pulmonary vascular resistance, afterload, and cardiac output in a setting of a single ventricle physiology. The physiological changes of pregnancy add additional burden to an already “fragile” physiology, making the anesthetic management for labor and/or cesarean delivery even more complex. Understanding the impact of these changes on the Fontan physiology and the effect of anesthetic choices on this dyad (pregnancy–Fontan) is an imperative prior to caring for these patients. In an effort to determine how these patients are best managed for labor and/or cesarean delivery, we have reviewed the literature examining the peripartum anesthetic management of parturients with Fontan circulation and have identified 27 case reports.

The Evaluation of Applied Anaesthetic Techniques for Caesarean in Parturients with Cardiac Diseases: Retrospective Analysis

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the effects of anaesthetic technique on mother and newborn were investigated in a retrospective analysis of parturients with cardiac diseases undergoing Caesarean section between 2006-2012.

METHODS

Our hospital's medical information system records were analyzed, and we found 107 parturients with cardiac disease and were undergoing Caesarean section, and their demographic data and obstetric, anaesthetic, and neonatal record forms were inspected.

RESULTS

Fifty-three (49.5%) pregnant women received general anaesthesia, and 54 (50.5%) received regional anaesthesia (34 spinal, 19 epidural and 1 CSE) (p=0.05). Week of pregnancy was lower for the group of general anaesthesia (p=0.007). Among cardiac parturients, valvular lesion rates were higher (75.7%). The relationship between existing cardiac disease and anaesthetic management was not significant (p=0.28). However, we determined that parturients with higher NYHA (New York Heart Association) classifications had higher general anaesthesia rates. (p=0.001). A rate of 39% of 74 NYHA I patients were undergoing general anaesthesia; this rate was 64% for NYHA II and 100% for NYHA III. The patients with cardiac surgery or medical treatment history had higher general anaesthesia rates (p=0.009). Although the general anaesthesia group newborn weights were lower (p=0.03), there was no difference between groups for APGAR scores. With regard to postoperative complications and hospital stay, the groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

We determined that general and epidural rates in parturients with cardiac diseases were similar, general anaesthesia was preferred for parturients who had higher NYHA classifications and surgical or medical treatment history. We considered that general anaesthesia criteria should reduce the anaesthesia management of parturients with cardiac disease; epidural or CSE anaesthesia applications should increase according to the patient's physical state, haemodynamic parameters, and obstetric indications.

Combined spinal-epidural versus epidural analgesia for labor and delivery

The rapid onset of analgesia and improved mobility with combined spinal-epidural (CSE) techniques has been associated with a higher degree of maternal satisfaction compared with conventional epidural analgesia. However, controversy exists in that initiation of labor analgesia with a CSE may be associated with an increased risk for nonreassuring fetal status (ie, fetal bradycardia) and a subsequent need for emergent cesarean delivery. Overall, both epidural and CSE techniques possess unique risk/benefit profiles, and the decision to use one technique rather than the other should be determined based on individual patient and clinical circumstances.

Epidural volume extension: a review

Epidural volume extension is a technical modification of the combined spinal epidural block. It involves the epidural injection of normal saline or a small volume of local anaesthetic after an intrathecal injection, aiming to augment the post-spinal sensory level. Although the consequent sensory block augmentation has been adequately documented, the probable factors influencing epidural volume extension and its implications for clinical practice are not well defined. This article reviews published literature relating to the probable factors affecting epidural volume extension, its clinical implications, case reports of its successful clinical application and summarises its unexplored effects.

Low-dose sequential combined-spinal epidural anesthesia for Cesarean section in patient with uncorrected tetrology of Fallot

Tetrology of Fallot (TOF) is the most commonly encountered congenital cardiac lesion in pregnancy. Although there are controversies regarding safe anesthetic technique for parturient with TOF, we use low-dose sequential combined-spinal epidural anesthesia in such a case posted for Cesarean section and found that low dose (0.5 ml of 0.5%) intrathecal bupivacaine and fentanyl with sequential epidural bupivacaine supplementation was adequate for the performance of an uncomplicated Cesarean section with minimal side effects and good fetal outcome. Thus, though the choice of anesthesia can vary in such patients, low-dose sequential combined-spinal epidural can be a safe alternate to achieve good anesthesia with impressive cardiovascular stability.

Regional anaesthesia for a Caesarean section in women with cardiac disease: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

We conducted a prospective observational survey of pregnant women with cardiac disease. The aim was to analyse and present the mode of delivery, outcome, and haemodynamic changes during a caesarean section under regional anaesthesia in women with cardiac disease.

METHODS

All pregnant women with a cardiovascular diagnosis, except hypertension, were included in the registry. Based on the cardiac diagnoses, and on the New York Heart Association classification, a multidisciplinary group made recommendations for each patient and decided on the mode of delivery. The data from continuous, invasive haemodynamic monitoring in intermediate- and high-risk patients under regional anaesthesia for a caesarean section were analysed and presented.

RESULTS

The hospital had approximately 9000 deliveries in the period from November 2003 to April 2008. A total of 113 pregnancies in 107 women were included. Thirty-two (28.3%) pregnancies were classified into the high-risk category. Of 103 deliveries, caesarean sections were performed in 59 (52.2%) cases, with regional anaesthesia in 51 patients (18 emergencies), general anaesthesia in eight patients (five emergencies), and a planned vaginal delivery in 44 patients. There was no mortality among the mothers or the babies during the hospital stay or 6 months postpartum. Pre-operative cardiovascular stability during the caesarean section was maintained by volume and phenylephrine infusion guided by invasive monitoring of haemodynamic variables.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that pregnant women with cardiac disease may safely deliver the baby by a caesarean section under regional anaesthesia. According to our findings, haemodynamic stability can be obtained by titrated regional anaesthesia, intravenous (i.v.) volume, phenylephrine infusion, and small repeated doses of i.v. oxytocin guided by invasive monitoring.

Peripartum anesthetic management of patients with aortic valve stenosis: a retrospective study and literature review

BACKGROUND

Anesthetic management of parturients with aortic stenosis is controversial. Early studies suggest maternal mortality was related to cardiac condition and anesthetic care. In this report, management of parturients with moderate or severe aortic stenosis in two institutions is compared, and published cases are reviewed.

METHODS

Peripartum anesthetic management of all parturients with moderate or severe aortic stenosis who gave birth between 1990 and 2005 at our institutions, is described. Patients with mild or non-valvular aortic stenosis were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 12 parturients, six with moderate and six with severe aortic stenosis. Two patients with moderate aortic stenosis were New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification II, the others were asymptomatic. Five patients with severe aortic stenosis were symptomatic (NYHA classification II or III). Two patients with moderate and three with severe aortic stenosis underwent cesarean delivery; epidural anesthesia was used for two. Two patients with moderate and all with serious aortic stenosis were observed postpartum for 24 to 48 h in a high-dependency unit. There were no severe maternal or neonatal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Carefully titrated regional analgesia is usually well tolerated in patients undergoing vaginal or cesarean delivery even in the presence of severe aortic stenosis. Standard monitoring is usually adequate for vaginal delivery, but invasive monitoring may facilitate management in some patients. An arterial line allows close monitoring of systemic blood pressure. Facilities for close 24-48-h post-partum observation should be available. A multidisciplinary approach is needed.