A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Spinal anesthesia for intrapartum Cesarean delivery following epidural labor analgesia: a retrospective cohort study. | LitMetric

Spinal anesthesia for intrapartum Cesarean delivery following epidural labor analgesia: a retrospective cohort study.

Can J Anaesth

Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management, Amphia Hospital, P.O. Box 90157, Breda 4800 RL, The Netherlands.

Published: August 2009

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study investigated the practice of removing epidural labor analgesia (ELA) before administering spinal anesthesia (SA) for Cesarean deliveries to avoid complications.
  • Data was collected from 693 parturients, showing that most received SA without prior ELA, and the outcomes were similar in terms of serious side effects.
  • The findings suggest that the risk of serious complications from SA after ELA is low and comparable to those receiving SA without ELA.

Article Abstract

Purpose: Failed conversion of epidural labor analgesia (ELA) to epidural surgical anesthesia (ESA) for intrapartum Cesarean delivery (CD) has been observed in clinical practice. However, spinal anesthesia (SA) in parturients experiencing failed conversion of ELA to ESA has been associated with an increased incidence of serious side effects. In this retrospective cohort analysis, we examined our routine clinical practice of removing the in situ epidural, rather than attempting to convert to ESA, prior to administering SA for intrapartum CD.

Methods: Hemodynamic data, frequencies of either high or total spinal block, and maternal and neonatal outcome data were gathered from the anesthesia records of all parturients at the Amphia Hospital, undergoing intrapartum CD between January 1, 2001 and May 1, 2005.

Results: Complete data were available for 693 patients (97.6%) of the 710 medical records that were identified. Of the 693 patients, 508 (73.3%) had no ELA and received SA, 128 patients (18.5%) received SA following epidural anesthesia for labor, 19 (2.7%) underwent conversion of ELA to ESA, and 38 (5.5%) received general anesthesia. When comparing both SA groups, no clinically relevant differences were observed regarding the incidence of total spinal block (0% in both groups) or high spinal block (0.2 vs 0.8%, P = 0.36). The number of hypotensive episodes, the total amount of ephedrine administered, and the Apgar scores recorded at 5 and 10 min were similar amongst groups.

Conclusions: The incidence of serious side effects associated with SA for intrapartum CD following ELA is low and not different compared to SA only.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-009-9113-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spinal block
12
spinal anesthesia
8
intrapartum cesarean
8
cesarean delivery
8
epidural labor
8
labor analgesia
8
retrospective cohort
8
failed conversion
8
clinical practice
8
conversion ela
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!