Mode of anaesthetic for category 1 caesarean sections and neonatal outcomes

Anesthetic and obstetric predictors of general anesthesia in urgent or emergent Cesarean delivery: a retrospective case-control study

PURPOSE

While regional anesthesia (RA) is considered preferable to general anesthesia (GA) for Cesarean delivery (CD), certain situations necessitate GA. This study reviewed the practice patterns around the use of GA for CD to identify modifiable predictors of GA with the goal of reducing GA rates.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, case-control study. Patients undergoing urgent/emergent CD over a 3-year period were identified, from which 102 patients undergoing GA and 102 patients undergoing RA were randomly selected. The data included patient characteristics, obstetrical indications for CD, type/indication of anesthetic, characteristics of airway management (GA group)/neuraxial anesthesia (RA group), and neonatal outcomes.

RESULTS

Abnormal fetal heart rate (aFHR) was the most common obstetrical indication for urgent/emergent CD amongst the cases (39%) and controls (39%). GA administration was most commonly due to "limited time due to maternal/fetal compromise" (56%), followed by "maternal contraindication to RA" (25%) and "inadequate RA" (17%). The most frequent modifiable anesthetic indication for GA was inadequate neuraxial anesthesia (17%). Anesthetic and obstetric predictors for GA included ASA classification [OR 0.11 (0.06-0.21)], emergency code activation [OR 13.55 (1.73-106.40)], failure to progress [OR 0.15 ((0.06-0.36)], labor in a patient scheduled for CD [OR 0.16 (0.05-0.57)], pregnancy-related illness [OR 8.63 (1.06-70.38)], cord/fetal prolapse [14.85(1.90-115.94)], and gestational age (OR 0.86 (0.81-0.92)).

CONCLUSION

Abnormal fetal heart rate, specifically bradycardia, was the most common obstetrical indication of GA for urgent/emergent CD, while inadequate neuraxial anesthesia was the most  modifiable anesthetic indication. Our data suggest aFHR and cord/fetal prolapse as potentially modifiable risk factors for GA in certain situations.

Regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy: American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Evidence-Based Guidelines (fifth edition)

Hemorrhagic complications associated with regional anesthesia are extremely rare. The fifth edition of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's Evidence-Based Guidelines on regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy reviews the published evidence since 2018 and provides guidance to help avoid this potentially catastrophic complication.The fifth edition of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's Evidence-Based Guidelines on regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy uses similar methodology as previous editions but is reorganized and significantly condensed. Therefore, the clinicians are encouraged to review the earlier texts for more detailed descriptions of methods, clinical trials, case series and pharmacology. It is impossible to perform large, randomized controlled trials evaluating a complication this rare; therefore, where the evidence is limited, the authors continue to maintain an 'antihemorrhagic' approach focused on patient safety and have proposed conservative times for the interruption of therapy prior to neural blockade. In previous versions, the anticoagulant doses were described as prophylactic and therapeutic. In this version, we will be using 'low dose' and 'high dose,' which will allow us to be consistent with other published guidelines and more accurately describe the dose in the setting of specific patient characteristics and indications. For example, the same 'high' dose may be used in one patient as a treatment for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and in another patient as prophylaxis for recurrent DVT. Due to the increasing ability to obtain drug-specific assays, we have included suggestions for when ordering these tests may be helpful and guide practice. Like previous editions, at the end of each recommendation the authors have clearly noted how the recommendation has changed from previous editions.

Median effective dose of spinal ropivacaine in combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery following failed vaginal delivery with epidural labor analgesia: a single-blind, sequential dose-finding study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to estimate the median effective dose of intrathecal isobaric ropivacaine without opioid required for adequate cesarean delivery anesthesia after epidural labor analgesia.

METHODS

Patients aged 20-40 years with American Society of Anesthesiology scores of I-II, body mass index ≤ 36, who underwent emergency cesarean delivery after failed vaginal delivery with epidural analgesia of a duration ≤ 6 h were included in the study. After removal of the epidural used for labor analgesia, a new combined spinal epidural was performed, and a dose of intrathecal isobaric ropivacaine without opioid was administered. The dose was determined using up-down methodology, with the starting patient's dose set to 12 mg. Adequate anesthesia, defined as a pinprick level no lower than T6 at 5 min after ropivacaine administration, resulted in the next patient receiving a dose of ropivacaine 1 mg higher, and inadequate anesthesia 1 mg lower. The primary outcome was the median (95% confidence interval (CI)) dose of spinal ropivacaine required for adequate cesarean delivery anesthesia.

RESULTS

Of the 46 patients included in the study, 40 were analyzed. The median spinal ropivacaine dose was 8.11 mg (95% CI 7.29-8.93 mg) by the Dixon and Mood method and 8.06 mg (95% CI 6.93-9.00 mg) by isotonic regression. Two patients had high spinal anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that for 50% of patients undergoing cesarean delivery after failed vaginal delivery with epidural analgesia, an 8-mg spinal dose of isobaric ropivacaine without opioid provides an anesthesia level no lower than T6 at 5 min.

Impacted fetal head at cesarean delivery

PURPOSE

Impacted fetal head (IFH) can be defined as the deep engagement of the fetal head in the maternal pelvis at the time of cesarean delivery that leads to its difficult or impossible extraction with standard surgical maneuvers. In this narrative review, we aimed to ascertain its incidence, risk factors, management and complications from the perspective of the anesthesiologist as a multidisciplinary team member.

METHODS

Databases were searched from inception to 24 January 2023 for keywords and subject headings associated with IFH and cesarean delivery.

RESULTS

IFH has an incidence of 2.9-71.8 % in emergency cesarean section. Maternal risk factors are advanced cervical dilatation, second stage of labor and oxytocin augmentation. Anesthetic and obstetric risk factors include epidural analgesia and trial of instrumental delivery and junior obstetrician, respectively. Neonatal risk factors are fetal malposition, caput and molding. Current evidence indicates a lack of confidence in the management of IFH across the multidisciplinary team. Simple interventions in IFH include lowering the height or placing the operating table in the Trendelenburg position, providing a step for the obstetrician and administering pharmacological tocolysis. Maternal complications are postpartum hemorrhage and bladder injury while neonatal complications include hypoxic brain injury, skull fracture and death. Surgical complications are reviewed to remind the anesthesiologist to anticipate and prepare for potential problems and manage complications in a timely manner.

CONCLUSION

The anesthesiologist has a fundamental role in the facilitation of delivery in IFH. We have proposed an evidence based management algorithm which may be referred to in this emergency situation.

ObsTIVA-UK: a service evaluation of obstetric total intravenous anaesthesia in the United Kingdom

We conducted a prospective observational service evaluation across the United Kingdom on the use of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) for obstetric surgery between November 2022 and June 2023. The primary aim was to describe the incidence of TIVA for obstetric surgery within participating units, with secondary aims to describe maternal and neonatal postoperative recovery indicators. Of 184 maternity units in the United Kingdom, 30 (16%) contributed data to the service evaluation. There were 104 patients who underwent caesarean delivery under TIVA and 19 patients had TIVA for other reasons. Infusions of propofol and remifentanil were used in 100% and 84% of cases, respectively. Fifty-nine out of 103 live neonates (57%) required some form of respiratory support. Of the neonates with recorded data, 73% and 17% had Apgar scores < 7 at 1 and 5 min respectively. No neonates were recorded to have Apgar scores < 7 at 10 min. Further prospective research is required to investigate the impact of obstetric TIVA on maternal and neonatal outcomes and inform best practice recommendations.

Effect of anesthesia type on outcome measures in cesarean section in the presence of fetal macrosomia

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of general and spinal anesthesia on maternal and neonatal outcomes during cesarean section in pregnancies with macrosomia.

METHODS:

This retrospective cohort study included 1043 patients who delivered by cesarean section between May 2018 and December 2021 and had a baby born with a birth weight of 4000 g or greater. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared according to the type of anesthesia performed in the spinal anesthesia group (n=903; 86.6%) and general anesthesia group (n=140; 13.4%). The Apgar score was categorized into <7 and ≥7.

RESULTS:

Neonates with an Apgar score of <7 at the first minute (11.4 vs. 0.4%; p<0.001) and the fifth minute (2.9 vs. 0.3%; p=0.004) were significantly higher in the general anesthesia group. The preoperative and postoperative hematocrit difference was significantly lower in patients who received spinal anesthesia than those who received general anesthesia [2 (1.1–3.1) vs. 4.05 (2.8–5.35); p<0.001]. The number of patients transfused was higher in the general anesthesia group (9.3 vs. 2.7%; p<0.001). In the regression model, general anesthesia, birth weight, and emergency conditions were significant independent factors related to the preoperative and postoperative hematocrit decrease (p<0.001, p=0.005, and p=0.034, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

Apgar scores of <7 at the first and fifth minutes are higher in macrosomic neonates who received general anesthesia than in neonates who received spinal anesthesia. Performing cesarean section under general anesthesia in mothers of macrosomic neonates results in a greater decrease in hematocrit value and a greater need for blood transfusion than under spinal anesthesia.

Impact of timing of multimodal analgesia in enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery protocols on postoperative opioids: A single center before-and-after study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery (ERAC) programs aim to decrease maternal morbidity and aid in maternal recovery and return to baseline. Multimodal analgesia is an important element of ERAC protocols, but no consensus exists on the timing of medication administration. We compared maternal pain outcomes following scheduled cesarean delivery with modification of the timing of administration of multimodal analgesia with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen.

DESIGN

Before-and-after study.

SETTING

Labor and delivery unit at a single academic institution.

INTERVENTION

NSAIDs and acetaminophen were administered as a fixed-interval alternating regimen every 3 h for the initial ERAC group (ERAC 1) and fixed-interval combined regimen every 6 h for the modified ERAC group (ERAC 2). ERAC 1 and ERAC 2 groups were compared to historical controls (Pre-ERAC).

PATIENTS

520 women undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery (Pre-ERAC n = 179, ERAC 1 n = 179, and ERAC 2 n = 162).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were postoperative total and daily opioid utilization as measured in morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Secondary outcomes included postoperative length of stay, maximum pain scores, and racial disparities in care.

MAIN RESULTS

The modified schedule of non-opioid analgesics involving combined administration (ERAC 2) versus alternating administration (ERAC 1) of multimodal analgesia resulted in decreased total postoperative opioid utilization (median = 26.3 vs 52.5 MME, Bonferroni corrected P = 0.002). Total postoperative opioid utilization among the ERAC 2 group was also significantly reduced compared to the Pre-ERAC group (median = 26.3 vs 105.0 MME, Bonferroni corrected P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary teams developing or modifying ERAC protocols for scheduled cesarean delivery should consider a combined administration at fixed intervals of NSAIDs and acetaminophen throughout the hospital stay to optimize postoperative pain management.

Defining the decision-to-delivery interval at caesarean section: narrative literature review and proposal for standardisation

The decision-to-delivery interval is a widely used term at non-elective caesarean section. While the definition may appear self-evident, there is no universally agreed consensus about when this period begins and ends. We reviewed the literature for original research utilising the terms 'decision-to-delivery', 'decision-to-incision' or 'incision-to-delivery' and examined definitions used for decision, delivery, incision, as well as any additional time intervals that were assessed. Our analysis demonstrated an inconsistent non-standardised approach to defining these intervals, which might have clinical practice and medicolegal ramifications. We propose that the decision-to-delivery interval should be defined as follows: the interval between the time at which the senior obstetrician makes the decision that a caesarean section is required and the time at which the fetus (or first fetus in the case of multiples) is delivered. The decision time should ideally be recorded contemporaneously in the medical notes or partogram.

Decision-to-delivery interval and neonatal outcomes for category-1 caesarean sections during the COVID-19 pandemic

General anaesthesia is known to achieve the shortest decision‐to‐delivery interval for category‐1 caesarean section. We investigated whether the COVID‐19 pandemic affected the decision‐to delivery interval and influenced neonatal outcomes in patients who underwent category‐1 caesarean section. Records of 562 patients who underwent emergency caesarean section between 1 April 2019 and 1 July 2019 in seven UK hospitals (pre‐COVID‐19 group) were compared with 577 emergency caesarean sections performed during the same period during the COVID‐19 pandemic (1 April 2020–1 July 2020) (post‐COVID‐19 group). Primary outcome measures were: decision‐to‐delivery interval; number of caesarean sections achieving decision‐to‐delivery interval < 30 min; and a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (Apgar 5‐min score < 7, umbilical arterial pH < 7.10, neonatal intensive care unit admission and stillbirth). The use of general anaesthesia decreased significantly between the pre‐ and post‐COVID‐19 groups (risk ratio 0.48 (95%CI 0.37–0.62); p < 0.0001). Compared with the pre‐COVID‐19 group, the post‐COVID‐19 group had an increase in median (IQR [range]) decision‐to‐delivery interval (26 (18–32 [4–124]) min vs. 27 (20–33 [3–102]) min; p = 0.043) and a decrease in the number of caesarean sections meeting the decision‐to‐delivery interval target of < 30 min (374/562 (66.5%) vs. 349/577 (60.5%); p = 0.02). The incidence of adverse neonatal outcomes was similar in the pre‐ and post‐COVID‐19 groups (140/568 (24.6%) vs. 140/583 (24.0%), respectively; p = 0.85). The small increase in decision‐to‐delivery interval observed during the COVID‐19 pandemic did not adversely affect neonatal outcomes.

The Current Role of General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The use of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has declined in the last decades due to the widespread utilization of neuraxial techniques and the understanding that neuraxial anesthesia can be provided even in urgent circumstances. In fact, the role of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has been revisited, because despite recent devices facilitating endotracheal intubation and clinical algorithms, guiding anesthesiologists facing challenging scenarios, risks, and complications of general anesthesia at the time of delivery for both mother and neonate(s) remain significant. In this review, we will discuss clinical scenarios and risk factors associated with general anesthesia for cesarean delivery and address reasons why anesthesiologists should apply strategies to minimize its use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Unnecessary general anesthesia for cesarean delivery is associated with maternal complications, including serious anesthesia-related complications, surgical site infection, and venous thromboembolic events. Racial and socioeconomic disparities and low-resource settings are major contributing factors in the use of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery, with both maternal and perinatal mortality increasing when general anesthesia is provided. In addition, more significant maternal pain and higher rates of postpartum depression requiring hospitalization are associated with general anesthesia for cesarean delivery.

SUMMARY

Rates of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery have overall decreased, and while general anesthesia no longer is a contributing factor to anesthesia-related maternal deaths, further opportunities to reduce its use should be emphasized. Raising awareness in identifying situations and patients at risk to help avoid unnecessary general anesthesia remains crucial.

General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective

The choice of anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery (CD) is one of the most important choices to make in obstetric anesthesia. In this study, we examine which type of anesthesia was used for emergency CD in our hospital, and how the choice affected the time from entry to the operation room until incision (TTI), time until delivery (TTD), and maternal/neonatal outcomes.

Methods

Retrospectively, we examined all emergency CD's performed in Shaare Zedek Medical Center between January-December 2018. Results: 1059 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 7.7% underwent general anesthesia (GA), 36.2% - conversion from labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia, 52% - spinal anesthesia and 4.1% - combined spinal epidural. We did not find a significant difference between the GA and conversion epidural groups in terms of TTI or TTD. Nevertheless, GA was found to be correlated to a high rate of blood-products requirement and ICU admission. The rate of newborns with an APGAR score of less than 7, in both first and fifth second after birth, was significantly higher in the GA group, as well as the need for NICU admission.

Conclusion

This study clearly emphasizes that the TTI are shortest when using GA or conversion of labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia. Meanwhile, GA is also linked to higher rates of admissions to ICU as well as poorer neonatal outcomes compared to the other groups. Additionally, our study uncovered a low rate of GA, and relatively low rate of regional anesthesia failure, which meets the accepted standards.

What obstetricians should know about obstetric anesthesia during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted obstetric anesthesiologists to reconsider the ways in which basic anesthesia care is provided on the Labor and Delivery Unit. Suggested modifications include an added emphasis on avoiding general anesthesia, a strong encouragement to infected individuals to opt for early neuraxial analgesia, and the prevention of emergent cesarean delivery, whenever possible. Through team efforts, adopting these measures can have real effects on reducing the transmission of the viral illness and maintaining patient and caregiver safety in the labor room.

[SBA 2020: Regional anesthesia guideline for using anticoagulants update]

The development of protocols to prevent perioperative Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) and the introduction of increasingly potent antithrombotic drugs have resulted in concerns of increased risk of neuraxial bleeding. Since the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) 2014 guideline, new oral anticoagulant drugs were approved by international regulating agencies, and by ANVISA. Societies and organizations that try to approach concerns through guidelines have presented conflicting perioperative management recommendations. As a response to these issues and to the need for a more rational approach, managements were updated in the present narrative revision, and guideline statements made. They were projected to encourage safe and quality patient care, but cannot assure specific results. Like any clinical guide recommendation, they are subject to review as knowledge grows, on specific complications, for example. The objective was to assess safety aspects of regional analgesia and anesthesia in patients using antithrombotic drugs, such as: possible technique-associated complications; spinal hematoma-associated risk factors, prevention strategies, diagnosis and treatment; safe interval for discontinuing and reinitiating medication after regional blockade.

Anesthesia and protection in an emergency cesarean section for pregnant woman infected with a novel coronavirus: case report and literature review

An outbreak of novel coronavirus pneumonia occurred worldwide since December 2019, which had been named COVID-19 subsequently. It is extremely transmissive that infection in pregnant women were unavoidable. The delivery process will produce large amount of contaminated media, leaving a challenge for medical personnel to ensure both the safety of the mother and infant and good self-protection. Only rare cases of pregnant women with COVID-19 are available for reference. Here, we report a 30-year-old woman had reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 at 36 weeks 2 days of gestation. Significant low and high variability of fetal heart rate baseline and severe variable decelerations were repeated after admission. An emergency cesarean section at 37 weeks 1 day of gestation under combined spinal and epidural anesthesia was performed with strict protection for all personnel. Anesthesia and operation went uneventfully. None of the participants were infected. We can conclude that when confronted with cesarean section in parturient with COVID-19, careful planning and detailed preparation can improve the safety of the mother and infant and reduce the risk of infection for medical staff to help preventing and controlling the epidemic.

What's new in obstetric anesthesia in 2018?

The Gerard W. Ostheimer Lecture presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology (SOAP) is a one-year summary of the literature published in domains of interest to anesthesiologists who manage and care for obstetric patients. One individual is asked to review the literature and present the lecture. This manuscript summarizes aspects of the Gerard W. Ostheimer Lecture presented at the 2019 SOAP meeting; the relevant literature from 2018 was summarized. The topics included in this review are maternal morbidity, antibiotic prophylaxis, anaphylaxis, the Lancet series on increasing cesarean delivery rates, the Robson Ten-Group Classification System, pelvic floor disorders, timing of delivery in nulliparous women, placenta accreta disorders, anesthesia for cesarean delivery, labor analgesia (including parturients with thrombocytopenia and tattoos, and epidural maintenance with the programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique), ultrasound use in obstetric anesthesia, and drugs in pregnancy.

Anesthesia for Urgent Cesarean Section

Cesarean section (CS) is a common surgical procedure worldwide. The anesthesiologist is responsible, together with obstetrician and neonatologist, for safe perioperative management. A continuum of risk exists for urgent CS. The decision-to-delivery interval is an important audit tool, to ensure international standards are upheld and good outcomes for mother and neonate are achieved. Urgent CS may be performed under either GA or RA, with benefits and risks attributable to each. Specific clinical scenarios require an individualized approach to anesthesia, including hemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, cardiac disease, the difficult airway and fetal compromise. Ongoing training is integral to the provision of safe anesthesia.

Labor Epidural Analgesia to Cesarean Section Anesthetic Conversion Failure: A National Survey

Background

If conversion of labor epidural analgesia to cesarean delivery anesthesia fails, the anesthesiologist can be confronted with a challenging clinical dilemma. Optimal management of a failed epidural top up continues to be debated in the absence of best practice guidelines.

Method

All members of the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association in the United Kingdom were emailed an online survey in May 2017. It obtained information on factors influencing the decision to utilize an existing labor epidural for cesarean section and, if epidural top up resulted in no objective sensory block, bilateral T10 sensory block, or unilateral T6 sensory block, factors influencing the management and selection of anesthetic technique. Differences in management options between respondents were compared using the chi-squared test.

Results

We received 710 survey questionnaires with an overall response rate of 41%. Most respondents (89%) would consider topping up an existing labor epidural for a category-one cesarean section. In evaluating whether or not to top up an existing labor epidural, the factors influencing decision-making were how effective the epidural had been for labor pain (99%), category of cesarean section (73%), and dermatomal level of blockade (61%). In the setting of a failed epidural top up, the most influential factors determining further anesthetic management were the category of cesarean section (92%), dermatomal level of blockade (78%), and the assessment of maternal airway. Spinal anesthesia was commonly preferred if an epidural top up resulted in no objective sensory block (74%), bilateral T10 sensory block (57%), or unilateral T6 sensory block (45%). If the sensory block level was higher or unilateral, then a lower dose of intrathecal local anesthetic was selected and alternative options such as combined-spinal epidural and general anesthesia were increasingly favored.

Discussion

Our survey revealed variations in the clinical management of a failed epidural top up for cesarean delivery, suggesting guidelines to aid decision-making are needed.

Influence of anaesthetic technique on maternal and foetal outcome in category 1 caesarean sections - A prospective single-centre observational study

Background and Aims:

In category 1 caesarean section (CS), there is limited evidence regarding superior anaesthetic technique. Hence, this study was designed to study the influence of anaesthetic technique on the maternal and foetal outcome.

Methods:

Patient characteristics, indication for CS, decision-to-delivery interval (DDI), uterine incision-to-delivery time (UIDT), cord blood pH, Apgar scores and neonatal and maternal outcome were noted. Composite endpoint (Apgar score <7, umbilical cord blood pH <7.2, neonatal intensive care unit admission or death) was created for adverse neonatal outcome. Logistic regression was done to assess the influence of confounding factors on the occurrence of adverse neonatal outcome.

Results:

Of 123 patients who underwent category 1 cesarean section, 114 patients were included for analysis. The DDI and UIDT were comparable. One and 5-min Apgar scores were significantly lower in the group general anaesthesia (GA) than in the group spinal anaesthesia (SA). The umbilical cord blood pH was comparable (7.21 ± 0.15 vs 7.25 ± 0.11 in groups GA and SA, respectively). Neonatal intensive care admission and maternal outcome were comparable in both the groups. Subgroup analysis of patients with foetal heart rate of less than 100 showed that group GA had significantly lower 1-min Apgar scores and umbilical cord blood pH and significantly more neonatal admission and mortality. Binominal logistic regression showed that group GA (odds ratio 2.9, 95% confidence intervals 1.27-6.41) and gestational age were independently associated with adverse neonatal outcome.

Conclusion:

GA for category 1 CS was associated with increased incidence of adverse neonatal outcome.

[Risk factors for maternal and perinatal mortality among women undergoing cesarean section in Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of Congo II]

Introduction

L’objectif était d’analyser les facteurs de risque de mortalité maternelle et périnatale de la césarienne à Lubumbashi, République Démocratique du Congo (RDC).

Méthodes

Étude multicentrique de 3643 césariennes réalisées entre le 1er janvier 2009 et le 31 décembre 2013 sur un total de 34199 accouchements dans cinq formations hospitalières de référence à Lubumbashi (RDC). Les données sociodémographiques, les indications, l’environnement obstétrical et la morbi-mortalité maternelles et périnatales ont été analysés au logiciel Epi Info 2011. Les fréquences calculées sont exprimées en pourcentage et les moyennes avec leurs écart-types. Le test de Chi-carré et le test exact de Fisher lorsque recommandés ont été utilisés pour la comparaison des fréquences. L’odds ratio a été calculé avec l’intervalle de confiance de 95% de Cornfield grâce à un modèle de régression logistique pour déterminer la puissance de facteurs de risque. Le seuil de signification a été fixé à p < 0,05.

Résultats

La fréquence de la césarienne était de 10,65%. L'âge moyen des césarisées était de 28,83±6,8 ans (extrêmes: 14 et 49 ans). La parité variait de 1 à 16 avec une moyenne de 2,6. De ces opérées, une sur neuf (10,9%) était porteuse d’un utérus cicatriciel de césarienne antérieure et 22,3% étaient des évacuées obstétricales. Les taux de létalité maternelle et périnatale étaient respectivement de 1,4% et 7,07% lors de la césarienne. L’analyse des facteurs de risque montre que la grande multiparité (≥5), l’absence de surveillance de la grossesse, le caractère urgent de l’indication opératoire influent significativement sur la mortalité maternelle. A ces facteurs s’ajoutent pour la mortalité périnatale l’âge maternel avancé (> 35 ans), l’évacuation comme mode d’admission et l’immaturité fœtale.

Conclusion

Cette étude montre que la césarienne dans nos conditions de travail est couplée à une forte mortalité maternelle et périnatale. Les facteurs de risque identifiés sont en grande partie évitables, surtout à tort ou à raison imputés à l’opération masquant ipso facto les circonstances souvent irrationnelles de sa pratique.

Introduction

The objective was to analyze risk factors for maternal and perinatal mortality among women undergoing cesarean section in Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Methods

We conducted a multicenter study of 3643 women undergoing cesarean sections between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2013 out of 34199 women delivering in five general referral hospitals in Lubumbashi (DRC). Sociodemographic data, indications, obstetrical environment as well as maternal and perinatal morbi-mortality were analyzed using Epi Info 2011 software. Computed frequencies were expressed in percentage and mean values were expressed in terms of standard deviations. Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test, when recommended, were used to compare frequencies. The odds ratio was calculated using Cornfield 95% confidence interval based on a logistic regression model in order to determine the strength of risk factors. Threshold significance level was set at p < 0.05.

Results

The frequency of cesarean sections was 10.65%. The average age of women undergoing cesarean section was 28.83 ± 6.8 years (with a range from 14 to 49 years). Parity ranged from 1 to 16 with an average of 2.6. 1 out of 9 (10.9%) women undergoing cesarean section were patients with previous caesarean section uterine scar on the anterior wall of the uterus and 22.3% of women were patients with previous obstetric evaquation. Maternal and perinatal mortality rate was 1.4% and 7.07% during cesarean section respectively. The analysis of risk factors shows that the great multiparity (≥5), the absence of monitoring during pregnancy, the urgent nature of emergency surgery significantly affect maternal mortality. Other factors for perinatal mortality included advanced maternal age (>35 years), patients referral from one facility to another as a mode of admission and fetal immaturity.

Conclusion

This study shows that cesarean section in our working condition is associated to a significant maternal and perinatal mortality. Identified risk factors are largely preventable, because they are rightly or wrongly ascribed to cesarean section glossing over, ipso facto, the often irrational circumstances of its practice.

Evaluation of timings and outcomes in category-one caesarean sections: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aims:

A decision-to-delivery interval (DDI) of 30 min for category-one caesarean section (CS) deliveries is the standard of practice recommended by clinical guidelines. Our institution established a protocol for category-one (‘crash’) CS to expedite deliveries. The aim of this study is to evaluate DDI, factors that affect DDI and the mode of anaesthesia for category-one CS.

Methods:

This retrospective cohort study evaluated 390 women who underwent category-one CS in a tertiary obstetric centre. We analysed the factors associated with DDI, mode of anaesthesia and perinatal outcomes. Summary statistics were performed for the outcomes. The association factors were considered significant at P < 0.05.

Results:

The mean (standard deviation) DDI was 9.4 (3.2) min with all deliveries achieved within 30 min. The longest factor in the DDI was time taken to transfer patients. A shorter DDI was not significantly associated with improved perinatal outcomes. The majority (88.9%) of women had general anaesthesia (GA) for category-one CS. Of those who had an epidural catheter already in situ (34.4%), 25.6% had successful epidural extension. GA was associated with shorter DDI, but worse perinatal outcomes than regional anaesthesia (RA).

Conclusions:

Our ‘crash’ CS protocol achieved 100% of deliveries within 30 min. The majority (88.9%) of the patients had GA for category-one CS. GA was found to be associated with shorter anaesthesia and operation times, but poorer perinatal outcomes compared to RA.

Emergency cesarean section in an epidemic of the middle east respiratory syndrome: a case report

Only a few reports have been published on women with an infectious respiratory viral pathogen, such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) Coronavirus delivering a baby. A laboratory confirmed case of MERS was reported during a MERS outbreak in the Republic of Korea in a woman at gestational week 35 + 4. She recovered, and delivered a healthy baby by emergency cesarean section (C-sec). We present the clinical course and the emergency C-sec in a pregnant woman with MERS.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Mode of Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities have been identified in the provision of neuraxial labor analgesia. These disparities may exist in other key aspects of obstetric anesthesia care. We sought to determine whether racial/ethnic disparities exist in mode of anesthesia for cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

Women who underwent CD between 1999 and 2002 at 19 different obstetric centers in the United States were identified from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Cesarean Registry. Race/ethnicity was categorized as: Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, and Non-Hispanic Others (NHOs). Mode of anesthesia was classified as neuraxial anesthesia (spinal, epidural, or combined spinal-epidural anesthesia) or general anesthesia. To account for obstetric and non-obstetric covariates that may have influenced mode of anesthesia, multiple logistic regression analyses were performed by using sequential sets of covariates.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 50,974 women who underwent CD. Rates of general anesthesia among racial/ethnic groups were as follows: 5.2% for Caucasians, 11.3% for African Americans, 5.8% for Hispanics, and 6.6% for NHOs. After adjustment for obstetric and non-obstetric covariates, African Americans had the highest odds of receiving general anesthesia compared with Caucasians (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-1.8; P < 0.001). The odds of receiving general anesthesia were also higher among Hispanics (aOR = 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; P = 0.02) and NHOs (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; P = 0.03) compared with Caucasians, respectively. In our sensitivity analysis, we reconstructed the models after excluding women who underwent neuraxial anesthesia before general anesthesia. The adjusted odds of receiving general anesthesia were similar to those in the main analysis: African Americans (aOR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9; P < 0.001); Hispanics (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4; P = 0.006); and NHOs (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.5; P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on data from the Cesarean Registry, African American women had the highest odds of undergoing general anesthesia for CD compared with Caucasian women. It is uncertain whether this disparity exists in current obstetric practice.

Mode of anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery: secondary analysis from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Caesarean Registry

BACKGROUND

Preterm delivery is often performed by Caesarean section. We investigated modes of anaesthesia and risk factors for general anaesthesia among women undergoing preterm Caesarean delivery.

METHODS

Women undergoing Caesarean delivery between 24(+0) and 36(+6) weeks' gestation were identified from a multicentre US registry. The mode of anaesthesia was classified as neuraxial anaesthesia (spinal, epidural, or combined spinal and epidural) or general anaesthesia. Logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristic, obstetric, and peripartum risk factors associated with general anaesthesia.

RESULTS

Within the study cohort, 11 539 women had preterm Caesarean delivery; 9510 (82.4%) underwent neuraxial anaesthesia and 2029 (17.6%) general anaesthesia. In our multivariate model, African-American race [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.7-2.2], Hispanic ethnicity (aOR=1.5; 95% CI=1.2-1.8), other race (aOR=1.4; 95% CI=1.1-1.9), and haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome or eclampsia (aOR=2.8; 95% CI=2.2-3.5) were independently associated with receiving general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery. Women with an emergency Caesarean delivery indication had the highest odds for general anaesthesia (aOR=3.5; 95% CI=3.1-3.9). For every 1 week decrease in gestational age at delivery, the adjusted odds of general anaesthesia increased by 13%.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, nearly one in five women received general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery. Although potential confounding by unmeasured factors cannot be excluded, our findings suggest that early gestational age at delivery, emergent Caesarean delivery indications, hypertensive disease, and non-Caucasian race or ethnicity are associated with general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery.

Anesthetic practice for Caesarean section and factors influencing anesthesiologists' choice of anesthesia: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

We examined the change in anesthetic practice for Caesarean section (CS) during the past decade and determined factors influencing anethesiologists' decisions.

METHODS

The cases were identified from data retrieved from Longitudinal Health Insurance Database released by the Taiwan National Health Research Institute in 2008. Trend analysis was performed using logistic regression models. The decision tree analysis was performed using the chi-squared automatic interaction detector method and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of general anesthesia.

RESULTS

A total of 25,606 women undergoing CS were studied. Logistic regression analyses revealed an upward trend of spinal anesthesia from 2000 to 2008 [57.8-67.5%, adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05-1.07, P < 0.001] and a decreasing trend across time for both general and epidural anesthesia (5.5-3.9% and 36.7-28.6%; both OR < 1, both P < 0.001). Patterns of change in anesthetic practice across time for emergency and non-emergency CS were similar (all P < 0.05). Our data further demonstrated that early or threatened labor, a history of preeclampsia, antepartum hemorrhage, emergency CS, and previous CS were important predictors that influenced the anesthesiologists' choice of general anesthesia versus neuraxial anesthesia for women undergoing CS.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal anesthesia was the most common mode of anesthesia for CS deliveries in Taiwan during the past decade. Early or threatened labor, antepartum hemorrhage, emergency CS, previous CS, and preeclampsia are significant determinants of general anesthesia in CS deliveries.