Risk prediction score for high spinal block in patients undergoing cesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY BMC Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI:10.1186/s12871-024-02799-w
Pannawit Benjhawaleemas, Baramee Brahmasakha Na Sakolnagara, Jutarat Tanasansuttiporn, Sunisa Chatmongkolchart, Maliwan Oofuvong
{"title":"Risk prediction score for high spinal block in patients undergoing cesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Pannawit Benjhawaleemas, Baramee Brahmasakha Na Sakolnagara, Jutarat Tanasansuttiporn, Sunisa Chatmongkolchart, Maliwan Oofuvong","doi":"10.1186/s12871-024-02799-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High spinal block is a serious complication of spinal anesthesia. However, findings regarding its associated risk factors are inconsistent, and no studies have reported a relevant risk prediction score. We aimed to determine the risk prediction score for high spinal block in patients who were induced spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a hospital in Southern Thailand between 2019 and 2020. We recorded demographic characteristics, gestational age (GA), hyperbaric bupivacaine dose, sensory block level, pre- and post-procedure blood pressure, and birth weight. High spinal block was defined as a decrease in pinprick sensation > T4. Risk scores, adjusted odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined. Risk scores were derived from the coefficients of the final multivariate logistic regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of high spinal block was 22.4% among the 1003 parturients. Our risk prediction tool for high spinal block had a sensitivity and specificity of 76% and 49%, respectively, and was classified into high (> 21), intermediate (15-21), and low (≤ 14) risk groups. The patient-related predictors were a GA < 35 weeks (OR [95% CI]: 2.31 [1.13, 4.71], score of 8), height < 150 cm (2.21 [1.11, 4.38], score of 8), and post-pregnancy body mass index > 27.5 kg/m<sup>2</sup> (2.68 [1.33, 5.41], score of 10). The anesthesia-related predictors were a hyperbaric bupivacaine dose > 11 mg (2.56 [1.34, 4.87], score of 9) and induction by a first-year resident (1.48 [1.05, 2.09], score of 4). The surgery-related predictors were previous cesarean delivery in labor (1.83 [1.2, 2.78], score of 6) and elective cesarean delivery (2.53 [1.57, 4.07], score of 9) compared to indication by cephalopelvic disproportion. The incidence of intraoperative hypotension was significantly higher in the high-block group than in the control group (46% vs. 25%, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The combination of patient- and anesthesia-related predictors played an important role in the intermediate- and high-risk groups for high sensory spinal block. Addressing the modifiable risk factors-a GA < 35 weeks, an optimal dose of bupivacaine, and the experience level of the spinal block performer-could minimize the risk of high spinal block during cesarean delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":9190,"journal":{"name":"BMC Anesthesiology","volume":"24 1","pages":"406"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552125/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-024-02799-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: High spinal block is a serious complication of spinal anesthesia. However, findings regarding its associated risk factors are inconsistent, and no studies have reported a relevant risk prediction score. We aimed to determine the risk prediction score for high spinal block in patients who were induced spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a hospital in Southern Thailand between 2019 and 2020. We recorded demographic characteristics, gestational age (GA), hyperbaric bupivacaine dose, sensory block level, pre- and post-procedure blood pressure, and birth weight. High spinal block was defined as a decrease in pinprick sensation > T4. Risk scores, adjusted odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined. Risk scores were derived from the coefficients of the final multivariate logistic regression model.

Results: The incidence of high spinal block was 22.4% among the 1003 parturients. Our risk prediction tool for high spinal block had a sensitivity and specificity of 76% and 49%, respectively, and was classified into high (> 21), intermediate (15-21), and low (≤ 14) risk groups. The patient-related predictors were a GA < 35 weeks (OR [95% CI]: 2.31 [1.13, 4.71], score of 8), height < 150 cm (2.21 [1.11, 4.38], score of 8), and post-pregnancy body mass index > 27.5 kg/m2 (2.68 [1.33, 5.41], score of 10). The anesthesia-related predictors were a hyperbaric bupivacaine dose > 11 mg (2.56 [1.34, 4.87], score of 9) and induction by a first-year resident (1.48 [1.05, 2.09], score of 4). The surgery-related predictors were previous cesarean delivery in labor (1.83 [1.2, 2.78], score of 6) and elective cesarean delivery (2.53 [1.57, 4.07], score of 9) compared to indication by cephalopelvic disproportion. The incidence of intraoperative hypotension was significantly higher in the high-block group than in the control group (46% vs. 25%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The combination of patient- and anesthesia-related predictors played an important role in the intermediate- and high-risk groups for high sensory spinal block. Addressing the modifiable risk factors-a GA < 35 weeks, an optimal dose of bupivacaine, and the experience level of the spinal block performer-could minimize the risk of high spinal block during cesarean delivery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
剖宫产患者高位脊柱阻滞风险预测评分:一项回顾性队列研究。
背景:高位脊髓阻滞是脊髓麻醉的一种严重并发症。然而,关于其相关风险因素的研究结果并不一致,也没有研究报告了相关的风险预测评分。我们旨在确定剖宫产脊麻患者高位脊麻阻滞的风险预测评分:这项回顾性队列研究于 2019 年至 2020 年在泰国南部的一家医院进行。我们记录了人口统计学特征、胎龄(GA)、高压布比卡因剂量、感觉阻滞水平、术前和术后血压以及出生体重。高度脊髓阻滞的定义是针刺感下降>T4。确定了风险评分、调整后的几率比(OR)和 95% 置信区间(CI)。风险评分来自最终多变量逻辑回归模型的系数:结果:在 1003 名产妇中,高度脊髓阻滞的发生率为 22.4%。我们的高椎管阻滞风险预测工具的灵敏度和特异性分别为 76% 和 49%,分为高风险组(> 21)、中风险组(15-21)和低风险组(≤ 14)。与患者相关的预测因素为体重 27.5 kg/m2(2.68 [1.33, 5.41],得分 10)。与麻醉相关的预测因素是高压布比卡因剂量大于 11 毫克(2.56 [1.34, 4.87],得分为 9)和由一年级住院医师进行诱导(1.48 [1.05, 2.09],得分为 4)。与头盆不称指征相比,与手术相关的预测因素为既往剖宫产(1.83 [1.2,2.78],6 分)和择期剖宫产(2.53 [1.57,4.07],9 分)。高阻滞组的术中低血压发生率明显高于对照组(46% 对 25%,P在高感觉脊髓阻滞的中高风险组中,患者和麻醉相关的综合预测因素发挥了重要作用。解决可改变的风险因素--GA
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Anesthesiology
BMC Anesthesiology ANESTHESIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
349
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Anesthesiology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of anesthesiology, critical care, perioperative care and pain management, including clinical and experimental research into anesthetic mechanisms, administration and efficacy, technology and monitoring, and associated economic issues.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating virtual reality anatomy training for novice anesthesiologists in performing ultrasound-guided brachial plexus blocks: a pilot study. Comparison of the effects of remimazolam and dexmedetomidine on the quality of recovery in functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a randomized clinical trial. Effect of the modified NUTRIC score in predicting the prognosis of patients admitted to intensive care units. Inhibitory effect of low-dose esketamine on cough induced by sufentanil during the induction of anesthesia and postoperative impact on mental health status: a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial. Anesthetic anaphylactic shock in an emergency cesarean section: a case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1