Dataset Information

A Comparison of Norepinephrine versus Phenylephrine to Prevent Hypotension after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of using phenylephrine or norepinephrine on the pH and base excess (BE) of the umbilical artery and vein in parturients undergoing cesarean section.

Methods

The study protocol was registered in INPLASY. Independent researchers searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome of this study was the umbilical artery (UA) or umbilical vein (UV) pH as neonatal condition at birth, and the secondary outcome was the UA or UV BE as an additional prognostic value over the measurement of umbilical pH.

Results

There was no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for overall, UA, and UV pH (mean difference (MD) -0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.004 to 0.007; MD 0.000, 95%CI -0.004 to 0.004; and MD 0.002, 95%CI -0.013 to 0.017). There was also no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for overall, UA, and UV BE (MD 0.096, 95% CI -0.258 to 0.451; MD 0.076, 95%CI -0.141 to 0.294; and MD 0.121, 95%CI; -0.569 to 0.811). A meta-regression showed that factors such as umbilical artery or vein, infusion method, single or twin, and the number of parturients per study had no effect on the UA pH, UV pH, UA BE, or UV BE. No evidence of publication bias was detected.

Conclusions

There was no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for umbilical pH and BE. A subgroup analysis and meta-regression also did not show evidence of differences.

SUBMITTER: Kang H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11355940 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Comparison of Norepinephrine versus Phenylephrine to Prevent Hypotension after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kang Hyun H Sung Tae-Yun TY Jee Young Seok YS Kwon Woojin W Cho Sung-Ae SA Ahn Somin S Cho Choon-Kyu CK

Journal of personalized medicine 20240729 8

<h4>Background</h4>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of using phenylephrine or norepinephrine on the pH and base excess (BE) of the umbilical artery and vein in parturients undergoing cesarean section.<h4>Methods</h4>The study protocol was registered in INPLASY. Independent researchers searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). T ...[more]

PMID: 39201995

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNorepinephrine infusion decreases hypotension after spinal anesthesia during cesarean section. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of norepinephrine infusion and ephedrine bolus against post-spinal hypotension in parturients.MethodsIn this double-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial, parturients scheduled for elective cesarean section were randomly allocated to receive norepinephrine infusion (0.05 μg·kg-1·min-1) just before spinal anesthesia continuing for 30 min or ephedrine bolus (0.15 mg/kg) just before spinal anesthesia. A rescue bolus (5 μg norepinephrine for the norepinephrine group, and 5 mg ephedrine for the ephedrine group) was administered whenever hypotension occurred. Our primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension within 30 min of spinal anesthesia administration. Secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal outcomes 30 min after spinal block, and neonatal cerebral oxygenation 10 min after birth.ResultsIn total, 190 patients were enrolled; of these patients, 177 were included in the final analysis. Fewer patients suffered hypotension in the norepinephrine group than in the ephedrine group (29.5% vs. 44.9%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.95, P = 0.034). Moreover, the tachycardia frequency was lower in the norepinephrine group than in the ephedrine group (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11-0.44, P < 0.001), and patients suffered less nausea and vomiting (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.11-0.70, P = 0.004). There was no difference in Apgar scores and umbilical arterial blood gas analysis between the two groups. However, neonatal cerebral regional saturations were significantly higher after birth in the norepinephrine group than in the ephedrine group (mean difference: 2.0%, 95% CI: 0.55%-3.45%, P = 0.008).ConclusionIn patients undergoing elective cesarean section with spinal anesthesia, norepinephrine infusion compared to ephedrine bolus resulted in less hypotension and tachycardia, and exhibited potential neonatal benefits.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02542748; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02542748.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravenous palonosetron compared to ondansetron on hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia in women undergoing cesarean section.MethodsFifty-four women scheduled for elective cesarean section were, randomly allocated to ondansetron group (n = 27) or palonosetron group (n = 27). Ten minutes prior to the administration of spinal anesthesia, participants received an intravenous injection of either ondansetron or palonosetron. A prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was initiated immediately following the intrathecal administration of bupivacaine and fentanyl. The infusion rate was titrated to maintain adequate blood pressure until the time of fetal delivery. The primary outcome was total dose of phenylephrine administered. The secondary outcomes were nausea or vomiting, the need for rescue antiemetics, hypotension, bradycardia, and shivering. Complete response rate, defined as the absence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and no need for additional antiemetics, were assessed for up to 24 hours post-surgery.ResultsNo significant differences were observed in the total dose of phenylephrine used between the ondansetron and palonosetron groups (387.5 μg [interquartile range, 291.3-507.8 μg versus 428.0 μg [interquartile range, 305.0-507.0 μg], P = 0.42). Complete response rates also showed no significant differences between the groups both within two hours post-spinal anesthesia (88.9% in the ondansetron group versus 100% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.24) and at 24 hours post-surgery (81.5% in the ondansetron group versus 88.8% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.7). In addition, there was no difference in other secondary outcomes.ConclusionProphylactic administration of palonosetron did not demonstrate a superior effect over ondansetron in mitigating hemodynamic changes or reducing phenylephrine requirements in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl for cesarean section.

Dataset Information

A Comparison of Norepinephrine versus Phenylephrine to Prevent Hypotension after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A Comparison of Norepinephrine versus Phenylephrine to Prevent Hypotension after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets