Dataset Information

Comparison of two vasopressor protocols for preventing hypotension post-spinal anesthesia during cesarean section: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Norepinephrine 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.

Methods

In 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.

Results

In 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).

Conclusion

In 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 registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02542748; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02542748.

SUBMITTER: Fan QQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8104294 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe study aimed to investigate whether prophylactic use of glycopyrrolate decreases the vasopressor requirements to prevent hypotension following spinal anesthesia during non-elective cesarean section.MethodIn this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 258 patients undergoing non-elective cesarean section were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous 0.2 mg glycopyrrolate or normal saline (placebo) before spinal anesthesia. The primary outcome was phenylephrine equivalent needed intraoperatively. Secondary outcomes included incidences of maternal hypotension, reactive hypertension, bradycardia, need for atropine, tachycardia, intraoperative nausea/vomiting, shivering, pruritus, dry mouth, dizziness; neonatal APGAR score at 1 min and 5 min, neonatal resuscitation needed, NICU admission and neonatal death.ResultsThree patients withdrew from the study due to failed spinal anesthesia. 128 patients in the glycopyrrolate group and 127 patients in the placebo group were analyzed. The mean phenylephrine equivalent needed was 1108.96 μg in the glycopyrrolate group and 1103.64 μg in the placebo group (mean difference, 5.32 μg [95% CI - 67.97 to 78.62]; P = 0.88). Hypotension occurred in 38 patients (30%) in the glycopyrrolate group as compared with 49 patients (39%) in the placebo group (P = 0.13). Tachycardia was reported in 70% of the participants in the glycopyrrolate group and 57% of those in the placebo group (P = 0.04). No statistically significant difference was noted in hypotensive episodes > 1, reactive hypertension, bradycardia, need for atropine, nausea, vomiting, shivering, and dry mouth between the two groups. Neonatal outcomes were similar in the two groups.ConclusionProphylactic use of glycopyrrolate does not decrease the requirements of vasopressor to prevent hypotension in non-elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.Trial registrationRegistration number: NCT04401345. Date of registration: 26/05/2020. Website: https://clinicaltrials.gov.

Project description:BackgroundSpinal anesthesia is the standard technique for elective cesarean section, but the incidence of maternal hypotension in this setting is reportedly about 80%, without any prophylactic management. Vasopressors are the most reliable method for counteracting the hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia. However, studies investigating the effects of vasopressors have yielded inconsistent and debatable results. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to identify the most effective vasopressor to prevent maternal hypotension, and to decrease fetal acidosis in women undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section.MethodsA systematic and comprehensive search to detect all the randomized controlled studies on vasopressors for the management of maternal hypotension during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia will be performed using information in the databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar, beginning from their inception to October 2018. We will conduct a network meta-analysis to combine the direct and indirect comparisons of the vasopressors. We will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of vasopressors. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to assess the presence of small-study effects. The quality of the studies included will be assessed using the risk of bias tool. All statistical analyses will be performed using Stata SE version 15.0.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Ethical approval and informed consent are not required, as the study will be a literature review and will not involve direct contact with patients or alterations to patient care.Trial registration numberThe protocol for this review has been registered in the PROSPERO network (registration number: CRD42018111852).

Project description:BackgroundFluid loading is an essential component of treatment for reducing the incidence of post-spinal anesthesia hypotension and is necessary to maintain intravascular volume, perfuse tissues, and control spinal anesthesia hypotension after sympathetic blockade. We performed a randomized sequential allocation dose-finding study to compare the effects of 10 mL/kg crystalloid and 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) co-load on the ED90 of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion for preventing post-spinal anesthesia hypotension during cesarean delivery.MethodsEighty patients were randomly allocated to receive either a 10 mL/kg crystalloid (Crystalloid Group, n = 40) or 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) (Colloid Group, n = 40) co-load combined with prophylactic norepinephrine infusion during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. The first patient received an initial prophylactic norepinephrine infusion rate of 0.025 μg/kg/min. Subsequent patients received a 0.005 μg/kg/min gradient dose of prophylactic norepinephrine. This dose was administered as a gradient based on its effectiveness for preventing post-spinal anesthesia hypotension (defined as SBP < 80% of baseline value) and determined by the up-and-down sequential allocation methodology. The primary study outcome was the ED90 of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of post-spinal anesthesia hypotension, bradycardia, hypertension, Apgar scores, and umbilical artery blood gas values were also measured.ResultsThe ED90 values of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion for preventing post-spinal anesthesia hypotension during cesarean delivery were 0.063 μg (95% CI: 0.050 to 0.064) and 0.062 μg (95% CI: 0.045 to 0.064) using isotonic regression analysis, and 0.068 μg (95% CI: 0.056 to 0.353) and 0.060 μg (95% CI: 0.050 to 3.590) using probit regression analysis in the Crystalloid Group and Colloid Group, respectively. The secondary outcomes were comparable between the two groups.ConclusionThe administration of a 10 mL/kg 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) does not provide additional benefits compared to crystalloid co-load in reducing the ED90 of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion for preventing post-spinal anesthesia hypotension during cesarean delivery.