Adequate Anesthesia and More Effective Analgesia by Adjusted Doses of Bupivacaine during Cesarean Section: A Randomized Double-blind Clinical Trial

Background

Several adjuvants, added to local anesthetics, were suggested to induce an ideal regional block with high-quality analgesia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the particular blocking properties of low-dose bupivacaine in combination with meperidine and fentanyl in spinal anesthesia during Cesarean sections.

Methods

A randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted at Hafez Hospital affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Shiraz, Iran) from February 2015 to February 2016. A total of 120 pregnant women, who underwent spinal anesthesia during elective Cesarean section were enrolled in the study. Based on block-wise randomization, the patients were randomly assigned to three groups, namely "B" group received 2 mL bupivacaine 0.5% (10 mg), "BM" group received 8 mg bupivacaine and 10 mg meperidine, and "BF" group received 8 mg bupivacaine and 15 µg fentanyl intrathecally. The block onset, the duration of analgesia, and the time of discharge from the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were all assessed. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 21, and P<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

The mean duration of motor blocks in the B group (150 min) were significantly higher than the BM (102 min) and BF (105 min) groups (P<0.0001). In both the BM and BF groups, the duration of sensory and motor blocks was the same. The length of stay in the PACU was significantly longer in the B group (P<0.001) than the BM and BF groups. When meperidine or fentanyl was added to bupivacaine, the duration of the analgesia lengthened (P<0.001).

Conclusion

Intrathecal low-dose spinal anesthesia induced by bupivacaine (8 mg) in combination with meperidine and/or fentanyl for Cesarean section increased maternal hemodynamic stability, while ensuring effective anesthetic conditions, extending effective analgesia, and reducing the length of stay in PACU.Trial Registration Number: IRCT2015013119470N14.

Effects of intrathecal opioids on cesarean section: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare the beneficial and harmful effects of opioids used as adjuncts to local anesthetics in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception until March, 2021 without language restrictions. The primary outcome was the complete analgesia duration (Time to VAS > 0). Data were synthesized using the Bayesian random-effects model. Evidence confidence was evaluated using the Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 66 placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 4400 patients undergoing elective cesarean section. Compared with the placebo, intrathecal opioids (fentanyl, sufentanil, and morphine) significantly prolonged the analgesia duration by 96, 96, and 190 min, respectively (mean difference). Despite morphine ranking first, opioid efficacy was similar; the results were inconsistent with respect to other analgesic outcomes. Except for diamorphine, all opioids were associated with significant increases in the pruritus incidence. Sufentanil and morphine were associated with increases in the respiratory depression incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed that intrathecal opioids benefit postoperative analgesia. Although morphine seems to be the most appropriate agent, some results were inconsistent, and the evidence confidence was often moderate or low, especially for adverse outcomes. Well-designed RCTs with an evidence-based approach are imperative for determining the most appropriate opioid for cesarean sections.

Granisetron or ondansentron to prevent hypotension after spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery: A randomized placebo-controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effects of high doses of ondansetron and granisetron before spinal anesthesia on hemodynamic parameters in patients undergoing elective cesarean section.

DESIGN

A double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

Operating room.

PATIENTS

A total of 120 parturients with term pregnancy undergoing elective cesarean section with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Three groups (n = 40 for each group) were formed by randomization. Five minutes before the anesthesia procedure, Group I received 8 mg intravenous (IV) ondansetron diluted in 10 ml normal saline, Group II received IV 3 mg granisetron diluted in 10 ml normal saline, and Group III received IV 10 ml normal saline.

MEASUREMENTS

Following intrathecal drug administration, intraoperative hemodynamic changes were recorded every 2 min for 20 min and then every 5 min until the end of the operation.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty patients (50%) in Group I, 12 patients (30%) in Group II, and 29 patients (72.5%) in Group III had hypotension requiring treatment with IV ephedrine (P = 0.001). The ephedrine requirement in Group III was significantly higher than in Groups I (P = 0.033) and II (P < 0.001). Also, the ephedrine requirement in Group II was lower than in Group I, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.055). The mean arterial pressure for the three groups differed in the 10th, 18th, and 60th minutes. The number of patients with nausea or vomiting was lower in Groups I and II than in Group III (P < 0.001). At 5 min, the Apgar scores were higher than 8 for all neonates. Postoperative scores for the visual analogue scale were similar for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that prophylactic IV administration of 3 mg of granisetron or 8 mg of ondansetron before spinal anesthesia results in a significantly lower ephedrine requirement compared to placebo.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and in the postoperative period.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions versus placebo or no intervention given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (16 April 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of studies and conference abstracts, and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Our primary outcomes are intraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Data entry was checked. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-four studies (involving 10,990 women) met our inclusion criteria. Sixty-nine studies, involving 8928 women, contributed data. Most studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Many studies were small with unclear risk of bias and sometimes few events. The overall certainty of the evidence assessed using GRADE was moderate to very low. 5-HT3 antagonists: We found intraoperative nausea may be reduced by 5-HT3 antagonists (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 0.71, 12 studies, 1419 women, low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in intraoperative vomiting but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.73, 11 studies, 1414 women, very low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in postoperative nausea (aRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.54, 10 studies, 1340 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and these drugs may show a reduction in postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.69, 10 studies, 1450 women, low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists: We found dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative nausea but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.52, 15 studies, 1180 women, very low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.60, 12 studies, 942 women, low-certainty evidence) and postoperative nausea (aRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79, 7 studies, 601 women, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if dopamine antagonists reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.92, 9 studies, 860 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids (steroids): We are uncertain if intraoperative nausea is reduced by corticosteroids (aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence) similarly for intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids probably reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73, 6 studies, 733 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95, 7 studies, 793 women, low-certainty evidence). Antihistamines: Antihistamines may have little to no effect on intraoperative nausea (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.11, 1 study, 149 women, very low-certainty evidence) or intraoperative vomiting (no events in the one study of 149 women). Antihistamines may reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.64, 4 studies, 514 women, low-certainty evidence), however, we are uncertain whether antihistamines reduce postoperative vomiting (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.81, 3 studies, 333 women, very low-certainty evidence). Anticholinergics: Anticholinergics may reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.87, 4 studies, 453 women, low-certainty evidence) but may have little to no effect on intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.54, 4 studies; 453 women, very low-certainty evidence). No studies looked at anticholinergics in postoperative nausea, but they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 1 study, 161 women, low-certainty evidence). Sedatives: We found that sedatives probably reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.82, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence) and intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.52, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain whether sedatives reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, 2 studies, 145 women, very low-certainty evidence) and they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, 2 studies, 145 women, low-certainty evidence). Opioid antagonists: There were no studies assessing intraoperative nausea or vomiting. Opioid antagonists may result in little or no difference to the number of women having postoperative nausea (aRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.45, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 1.25, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.43, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence). Acupressure: It is uncertain whether acupressure/acupuncture reduces intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 9 studies, 1221 women, very low-certainty evidence). Acupressure may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, 9 studies, 1221 women, low-certainty evidence) but it is uncertain whether it reduces postoperative nausea (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.79, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence). Ginger: It is uncertain whether ginger makes any difference to the number of women having intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.21, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.00, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), postoperative nausea (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.77, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence) and postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.65, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence). Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes including adverse effects or women's views.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that 5-HT3 antagonists, dopamine antagonists, corticosteroids, sedatives and acupressure probably or possibly have efficacy in reducing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. However the certainty of evidence varied widely and was generally low. Future research is needed to assess side effects of treatment, women's views and to compare the efficacy of combinations of different medications.

Efficacy of premixed versus succedent administration of fentanyl and bupivacaine in subarachnoid block for lower limb surgeries: A randomised control trial

Background and Aims

Subarachnoid block is the most commonly used anaesthesia technique for lower limb surgeries. Opioids are the most commonly used adjuvants with local anesthetics (LA). Adjuvants are given premixed with LA loaded in a single syringe. This study was conducted to evaluate differences in level of sensory and motor block and incidence of hypotension whilst administering hyperbaric bupivacaine and fentanyl either in a single syringe or different syringes. The effect of administering opioid prior to LA and vice versa on these parameters was also assessed.

Methods

One hundred and twenty patients were randomly allocated into three groups of 40 each: Group A received premixed 0.5% heavy bupivacaine 2.5 ml (12.5 mg) and 0.5 ml (25 microgram) of fentanyl in a single 3.0 ml syringe, Group B received 0.5 ml (25 microgram) of fentanyl in a 3.0 ml syringe followed by 0.5% heavy bupivacaine 2.5 ml (12.5 mg) in a 3.0 ml syringe, Group C received 0.5% heavy bupivacaine 2.5 ml (12.5 mg) in a 3.0 ml syringe followed by 0.5 ml (25 microgram) fentanyl in a 3.0 ml syringe. All statistical calculations were done using SPSS 21 version statistical program for Microsoft Windows.

Results

The mean time for onset of sensory and motor block was least in group C followed by group B. The duration of sensory and motor block was prolonged in groups B and C. Patients in group A experienced more hypotension as compared to groups B and C.

Conclusion

Administering hyperbaric bupivacaine first followed by fentanyl leads to an early onset and prolonged duration of sensory and motor block.

Effect of intrathecal lipophilic opioids on the incidence of shivering in women undergoing cesarean delivery after spinal anesthesia: a systematic review and bayesian network meta- analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Shivering is a common side effect in women having cesarean delivery (CD) under spinal anesthesia, which can be bothersome to the patient, and it can also interfere with perioperative monitoring. In several studies, the intrathecal (IT) addition of a lipophilic opioid to local anesthetics has been shown to decrease the incidence of shivering.

Objective

We performed this network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of intrathecal lipophilic opioids in preventing the incidence of shivering in patients undergoing CD.

Methods

This review was planned according to the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-NMA) guidelines. An English literature search of multiple electronic databases was conducted. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the incidence of shivering, with study groups receiving either IT fentanyl, sufentanil, or meperidine in women undergoing CD under spinal anesthesia. Quality of the studies was assessed using the modified Oxford scoring system. Using random-effects modeling, dichotomous data were extracted and summarized using odds ratio (OR) with a 95% credible interval (CrI). Statistical analysis was conducted using R studio version 1.0.153 - Inc.

Results

Twenty-one studies consisting of 1433 patients (Control group: 590 patients in twenty-one studies; Fentanyl group:199 patients in seven studies; Sufentanil group: 156 patients in five studies; Meperidine group: 488 patients in ten studies) met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review investigating the effect of intrathecal lipophilic opioids in preventing the incidence of shivering in women undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. Methodological validity scores ranged from 3 to 7. The Bayesian mixed network estimate showed the incidence of shivering was significantly lower with IT fentanyl (pooled odds ratio (OR): 0.13; 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.04 to 0.35; P = 0.0004) and IT meperidine (OR: 0.12; 95% CrI: 0.05 to 0.29; P < 0.00001), but not with IT sufentanil (OR: 0.37; 95% CrI: 0.11 to 1.22; P = 0.23). The IT fentanyl group had a significantly lower incidence of intraoperative discomfort [Risk Ratio (RR): 0.19; 95% CI: 0.10–0.35; P < 0.00001], the IT sufentanil group had a significantly higher incidence of pruritus (RR: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.18–32.46; P = 0.03) The IT meperidine group had a significantly lower incidence of intraoperative discomfort (2.7% vs. 13.6%; RR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.09–0.55; P = 0.001), but there was a significant increase in nausea and vomiting (IT meperidine group vs. Control group: 42.7% vs. 19.4%; RR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.14–5.75; P = 0.02). Meta-regression analysis based on the opioid dose and quality of the study did not impact the final inference of our result.

Conclusion

IT fentanyl significantly decreased the incidence of shivering in women undergoing CD under spinal anesthesia without increasing maternal adverse events, confirming that routine use in this patient population is a good choice. IT sufentanil did not decrease the incidence of shivering. IT meperidine decreased the incidence and severity of shivering, but its use was also associated with significant nausea and vomiting.

Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Maternal hypotension is the most frequent complication of spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. It can be associated with nausea or vomiting and may pose serious risks to the mother (unconsciousness, pulmonary aspiration) and baby (hypoxia, acidosis, neurological injury).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prophylactic interventions for hypotension following spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 August 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, including full texts and abstracts, comparing interventions to prevent hypotension with placebo or alternative treatment in women having spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. We excluded studies if hypotension was not an outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data from eligible studies. We report 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 125 studies involving 9469 women. Interventions were to prevent maternal hypotension following spinal anaesthesia only, and we excluded any interventions considered active treatment. All the included studies reported the review's primary outcome. Across 49 comparisons, we identified three intervention groups: intravenous fluids, pharmacological interventions, and physical interventions. Authors reported no serious adverse effects with any of the interventions investigated. Most trials reported hypotension requiring intervention and Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes as the only outcomes. None of the trials included in the comparisons we describe reported admission to neonatal intensive care unit. Crystalloid versus control (no fluids) Fewer women experienced hypotension in the crystalloid group compared with no fluids (average risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.98; 370 women; 5 studies; low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between groups in numbers of women with nausea and vomiting (average RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.91; 1 study; 69 women; very low-quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (60 babies, low-quality evidence). Colloid versus crystalloid Fewer women experienced hypotension in the colloid group compared with the crystalloid group (average RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.81; 2009 women; 27 studies; very low-quality evidence). There were no clear differences between groups for maternal hypertension requiring intervention (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.09 to 4.46, 3 studies, 327 women; very low-quality evidence), maternal bradycardia requiring intervention (average RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.78, 5 studies, 413 women; very low-quality evidence), nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.19, 14 studies, 1058 women, I² = 29%; very low-quality evidence), neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.52, 6 studies, 678 babies; very low-quality evidence), or Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes (average RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.05, 10 studies, 730 babies; very low-quality evidence). Ephedrine versus phenylephrine There were no clear differences between ephedrine and phenylephrine groups for preventing maternal hypotension (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.18; 401 women; 8 studies; very low-quality evidence) or hypertension (average RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.16, 2 studies, 118 women, low-quality evidence). Rates of bradycardia were lower in the ephedrine group (average RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.64, 5 studies, 304 women, low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference in the number of women with nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.49, 4 studies, 204 women, I² = 37%, very low-quality evidence), or babies with neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.07 to 12.00, 3 studies, 175 babies, low-quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (321 babies; low-quality evidence). Ondansetron versus control Ondansetron administration was more effective than control (placebo saline) for preventing hypotension requiring treatment (average RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; 740 women, 8 studies, low-quality evidence), bradycardia requiring treatment (average RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.87; 740 women, 8 studies, low-quality evidence), and nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.51; 653 women, 7 studies, low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between the groups in rates of neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.09; 134 babies; 2 studies, low-quality evidence) or Apgar scores of less than 8 at five minutes (284 babies, low-quality evidence). Lower limb compression versus control Lower limb compression was more effective than control for preventing hypotension (average RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.78, 11 studies, 705 women, I² = 65%, very low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between the groups in rates of bradycardia (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.56, 1 study, 74 women, very low-quality evidence) or nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.27, 4 studies, 276 women, I² = 32%, very-low quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (130 babies, very low-quality evidence). Walking versus lying There was no clear difference between the groups for women with hypotension requiring treatment (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.21, 1 study, 37 women, very low-quality evidence). Many included studies reported little to no information that would allow an assessment of their risk of bias, limiting our ability to draw meaningful conclusions. GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. We downgraded evidence for limitations in study design, imprecision, and indirectness; most studies assessed only women scheduled for elective caesarean sections. External validity also needs consideration. Readers should question the use of colloids in this context given the serious potential side effects such as allergy and renal failure associated with their administration.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While interventions such as crystalloids, colloids, ephedrine, phenylephrine, ondansetron, or lower leg compression can reduce the incidence of hypotension, none have been shown to eliminate the need to treat maternal hypotension in some women. We cannot draw any conclusions regarding rare adverse effects associated with use of the interventions (for example colloids) due to the relatively small numbers of women studied.

The Effect of Intrathecal Meperidine on Maternal and Newborn Outcomes After Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Study

Context

Spinal anesthesia is the most preferred method for cesarean section. This meta-analysis was performed to determine the effect of minimum and maximum intrathecal doses of meperidine (pethidine) [5 to 40 mg] on the maternal and newborn outcomes after cesarean section.

Evidence Acquisition

The data were collected through the systematic search in the ISI, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Barakat, MagIran, SID, Irandoc, and EMBASE medical databases. Eighteen clinical trial studies with 1,494 patients were included.

Results

Patients who had received intrathecal meperidine had experienced lower shivering, relative risk [RR] = 0.34 (95% CI = 0.23, 0.48) and longer analgesia, [standard mean difference (SMD)] = 7.67 (95% CI = 1.85, 13.49) after the surgery. Moreover, RR of nausea = 1.37 (95% CI = 1.13, 1.66), vomiting RR = 2.02 (95% CI = 1.28, 3.20), and pruritus RR = 9.26 (95% CI = 4.17, 20.58) was higher in the pethidine group than in the control group. There was no statistically significant difference in the Apgar score at one-minute RR = 0.99 (95% CI = 0.9, 1.09), at five-minute RR = 0.93 (95% CI = 0.87, 1.08), maternal hypotension RR = 1.00 (95% CI = 0.87, 1.15), and maternal sensory and motor blockade durations, SMD = -1.72 (95% CI = -3.78.0.34) and SMD = -4.38 (95% CI = -9.19, 0.44), respectively in the two pethidine and control groups.

Conclusions

Intrathecal meperidine can reduce shivering and increase the duration of postoperative analgesia, though it increases the relative risk of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. No significant difference was found both in the Apgar score, maternal hypotension, and duration of the motor and sensory block.

Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Maternal hypotension is the most frequent complication of spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. It can be associated with nausea or vomiting and may pose serious risks to the mother (unconsciousness, pulmonary aspiration) and baby (hypoxia, acidosis, neurological injury).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prophylactic interventions for hypotension following spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 August 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, including full texts and abstracts, comparing interventions to prevent hypotension with placebo or alternative treatment in women having spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. We excluded studies if hypotension was not an outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data from eligible studies. We report 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 126 studies involving 9565 participants. Interventions were to prevent maternal hypotension following spinal anaesthesia only, and we excluded any interventions considered active treatment. All the included studies reported the review's primary outcome. Across 49 comparisons, we identified three intervention groups: intravenous fluids, pharmacological interventions, and physical interventions. Authors reported no serious adverse effects with any of the interventions investigated. Most trials reported hypotension requiring intervention and Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes as the only outcomes. None of the trials included in the comparisons we describe reported admission to neonatal intensive care unit. Crystalloid versus control (no fluids)Fewer women experienced hypotension in the crystalloid group compared with no fluids (average risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.98; 370 women; 5 studies; low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between groups in numbers of women with nausea and vomiting (average RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.91; 1 study; 69 women; very low-quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (60 babies, low-quality evidence). Colloid versus crystalloidFewer women experienced hypotension in the colloid group compared with the crystalloid group (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.80; 2105 women; 28 studies; very low-quality evidence). There were no clear differences between groups for maternal hypertension requiring intervention (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.09 to 4.46, 3 studies, 327 women;very low-quality evidence), maternal bradycardia requiring intervention (average RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.79, 6 studies, 509 women; very low-quality evidence), nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13, 15 studies, 1154 women, I² = 37%; very low-quality evidence), neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.52, 6 studies, 678 babies; very low-quality evidence), or Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes (average RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.05, 11 studies, 826 babies; very low-quality evidence). Ephedrine versus phenylephrineThere were no clear differences between ephedrine and phenylephrine groups for preventing maternal hypotension (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.18; 401 women; 8 studies; very low-quality evidence) or hypertension (average RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.16, 2 studies, 118 women, low-quality evidence). Rates of bradycardia were lower in the ephedrine group (average RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.64, 5 studies, 304 women, low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference in the number of women with nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.49, 4 studies, 204 women, I² = 37%, very low-quality evidence), or babies with neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.07 to 12.00, 3 studies, 175 babies, low-quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (321 babies; low-quality evidence). Ondansetron versus controlOndansetron administration was more effective than control (placebo saline) for preventing hypotension requiring treatment (average RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; 740 women, 8 studies, low-quality evidence), bradycardia requiring treatment (average RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.87; 740 women, 8 studies, low-quality evidence), and nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.51; 653 women, 7 studies, low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between the groups in rates of neonatal acidosis (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.09; 134 babies; 2 studies, low-quality evidence) or Apgar scores of less than 8 at five minutes (284 babies, low-quality evidence). Lower limb compression versus controlLower limb compression was more effective than control for preventing hypotension (average RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.78, 11 studies, 705 women, I² = 65%, very low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference between the groups in rates of bradycardia (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.56, 1 study, 74 women, very low-quality evidence) or nausea and/or vomiting (average RR 0.42 , 95% CI 0.14 to 1.27, 4 studies, 276 women, I² = 32%, very-low quality evidence). No baby had an Apgar score of less than 8 at five minutes in either group (130 babies, very low-quality evidence). Walking versus lyingThere was no clear difference between the groups for women with hypotension requiring treatment (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.21, 1 study, 37 women, very low-quality evidence).Many included studies reported little to no information that would allow an assessment of their risk of bias, limiting our ability to draw meaningful conclusions. GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. We downgraded evidence for limitations in study design, imprecision, and indirectness; most studies assessed only women scheduled for elective caesarean sections.External validity also needs consideration. Readers should question the use of colloids in this context given the serious potential side effects such as allergy and renal failure associated with their administration.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While interventions such as crystalloids, colloids, ephedrine, phenylephrine, ondansetron, or lower leg compression can reduce the incidence of hypotension, none have been shown to eliminate the need to treat maternal hypotension in some women. We cannot draw any conclusions regarding rare adverse effects associated with use of the interventions (for example colloids) due to the relatively small numbers of women studied.

Two syringe spinal anesthesia technique for cesarean section: A controlled randomized study of a simple way to achieve more satisfactory block and less hypotension

BACKGROUND

Multiple trials have been tried to prevent hypotension during spinal anesthesia. However, the drug choice and mode of administration is still a matter of debate.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcome of spinal injection of hyperbaric bupivacaine and fentanyl separately to standard injection of mixed fentanyl with hyperbaric bupivacaine.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

A randomized, controlled clinical trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty-four parturient scheduled for elective cesarean section were randomly allocated into two groups, each 62 parturient: Group M received spinal anesthesia using 10 mg bupivacaine 0.5% premixed with 25 μg fentanyl in the same syringe and Group S received 25 μg fentanyl in one syringe and 10 mg bupivacaine 0.5% without barbotage in a second syringe.

RESULTS

Patients with intraoperative pain that was controllable without the need for a shift to general anesthesia was significantly lower in Group S (3.2%) than in Group M (16.1%). The frequency of hypotension was significantly lower in Group S compared to Group M (P < 0.05). Time till the onset of sensory block was nonsignificantly shorter with nonsignificantly higher mean level of maximal sensory block in Group S compared to Group M (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the time till occurrence of hypotension, duration of hypotension, mean dose of ephedrine used for the treatment of hypotension and frequency of patients developed itching between the groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Separate intrathecal injection of fentanyl and hyperbaric bupivacaine provided a significant improvement in the quality of sensory block and significant reduction of the frequency of hypotension compared to injection of mixed medications.

Anaesthesia Techniques for Caesarean Operations: Retrospective Analysis of Last Decade

OBJECTIVE

The technique of anaesthesia in caesarean sections is selected according to the patient's clinical presentation, experience of the anaesthesist and the patient's wishes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the anaesthesia methods employed in our clinic in the last decade (2003-2012).

METHODS

Records of caesarean operations performed between 2003-2012 in the Anaesthesia department of Atatürk University Medical Faculty and stored in the hospital computer system were examined. The annual distribution of methods of anaesthesia in operations was analysed.

RESULTS

During 2003-2012, 9049 caesarean operations were performed in our clinic. General anaesthesia was used in 45% of operations and regional anaesthesia in 54%. Whereas the rate of regional anaesthesia in 2003 was 34%, this increased to 69% in 2012. The most commonly used method of regional anaesthesia was spinal anaesthesia (34%) in 2003, and spinal anaesthesia (41%) and combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia (27%) in 2012.

CONCLUSION

The most commonly used anaesthesia technique for caesarean operations in our clinic between 2003-2012 was spinal anaesthesia. The most widely used regional anaesthetic method in our clinic was spinal anaesthesia. A significant increase in the use of the combined spinal-epidural anaesthetic technique occurred in the last two years of the study period.

Efficacy of premixed versus sequential administration of clonidine as an adjuvant to hyperbaric bupivacaine intrathecally in cesarean section

Background:

Density of the drugs injected intrathecally is an important factor that influences spread in the cerebrospinal fluid. Mixing adjuvants with local anesthetics (LA) alters their density and hence their spread compared to when given sequentially in seperate syringes.

Aims:

To evaluate the efficacy of intrathecal administration of hyperbaric bupivacaine (HB) and clonidine as a mixture and sequentially in terms of block characteristics, hemodynamics, neonatal outcome, and postoperative pain.

Setting and Design:

Prospective randomized single blind study at a tertiary center from 2010 to 2012.

Materials and Methods:

Ninety full-term parturient scheduled for elective cesarean sections were divided into three groups on the basis of technique of intrathecal drug administration. Group M received mixture of 75 μg clonidine and 10 mg HB 0.5%. Group A received 75 μg clonidine after administration of 10 mg HB 0.5% through separate syringe. Group B received 75 μg clonidine before HB 0.5% (10 mg) through separate syringe.

Statistical analysis used:

Observational descriptive statistics, analysis of variance with Bonferroni multiple comparison post hoc test, and Chi-square test.

Results:

Time to achieve complete sensory and motor block was less in group A and B in which drugs were given sequentially. Duration of analgesia lasted longer in group B (474.3 ± 20.79 min) and group A (472.50 ± 22.11 min) than in group M (337 ± 18.22 min) with clinically insignificant influence on hemodynamic parameters and sedation.

Conclusion:

Sequential technique reduces time to achieve complete sensory and motor block, delays block regression, and significantly prolongs the duration of analgesia. However, it did not matter much whether clonidine was administered before or after HB.

Spinal pethidine for elective caesarean section

Pethidine (meperidine) is a unique member of the opioid family. In addition to its analgesic activity, it also has significant local anaesthetic activity. This property enables it to be used as the sole agent for spinal anaesthesia. We describe the successful use of intrathecal pethidine 1 mg/kg for an elective lower segment caesarean section in a patient presumed to be allergic to amide local anaesthetics. There were no significant adverse effects in either the mother or the newborn.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and can also occur in the period following the procedure. 

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 February 2012) and reference lists of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.  

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria but only 41 studies, involving 5046 women, provided useable data for the review involving women having caesareans under regional anaesthesia. The majority of the studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Only two studies included emergency surgery, however, they did not stratify data according to type of surgery. The studies covered numerous comparisons, but the majority of studies involved 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor antagonists, corticosteroids or acupressure. Studies were mainly small and of unclear quality.Three classes of intervention were found to be effective in at least three out of four of our primary outcomes (intraoperative nausea, intraoperative vomiting, postoperative nausea and postoperative vomiting). These interventions were 5-HT(3) antagonists, dopamine antagonists and sedatives. Other classes of intervention were effective for fewer than three of our primary outcomes.With 5-HT antagonists, we found a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.88, eight studies, 720 women). There were also reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.64, four studies, 405 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.77, five studies, 565 women). We did not detect a significant reduction in intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.00, seven studies, 668 women).Dopamine antagonists demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.57, nine studies, 636 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, eight studies, 536 women), with similar reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.91, five studies, 412 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.91, six studies, 472 women). These differences were observed with both metoclopramide and droperidol.Sedatives (most commonly propofol) demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.96, four studies, 285 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, four studies, 285 women), also with a reduction in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, two studies 145 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, two studies, 145 women).Acupressure was found to be effective for intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.90, six studies, 649 women) but not postoperative nausea (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.00, three studies, 429 women). Acupressure was not effective at reducing vomiting either intraoperatively (average RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.18, six studies, 649 women) or postoperatively (average RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.06, three studies, 429 women).Other effective intervention classes included corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics.There were insufficient data to demonstrate any class of intervention was superior to another. There were no significant differences observed in the comparison of combined versus single interventions.Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes or the incidence of adverse effects. However, one study showed an increase in respiratory depression with sedation (midazolam) compared with dopamine antagonists.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that many different interventions have efficacy in preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. There is little evidence that combinations of treatment are better than single agents.

Combination of low-dose bupivacaine and opioids provides satisfactory analgesia with less intraoperative hypotension for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section

AIMS

This meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the three most common drug regimens of bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: high-dose bupivacaine (≥10 mg, HB), low-dose bupivacaine (<10 mg, LB) and combination of low-dose bupivacaine and opioids (LBO).

METHODS

Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched (updated on October 30, 2011). Primary endpoints were the incidence of intraoperative hypotension and analgesia efficacy. Pooled risk ratio (RR) or standard mean difference and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. A RR <1 indicates that LB or LBO regimen is associated with less intraoperative complications and better anesthesia or analgesia efficacy.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled trials including 605 parturients were analyzed. Results of this meta-analysis showed that compared with HB regimen, LB regimen decreased the incidence of intraoperative hypotension (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.42-0.96) with less satisfactory analgesia (fixed model, RR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.14-1.98). LBO regimen significantly reduced the incidence of intraoperative hypotension (RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.82) with reliable analgesia efficacy (RR = 2.56, 95% CI: 0.77-8.48).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional HB regimen and LB regimen, LBO regimen not only reduced intraoperative hypotension but also provided reliable analgesia. Therefore, LBO regimen should be considered as the preferred drug combination for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section.