Ephedrine Infusion with Rescue Ephedrine Boluses versus Rescue Boluses alone for Preventing Hypotension during Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery.

Mustafa Bajraktari, Blerim Arapi, G. Huti, Asead Abdyli, R. Domi
{"title":"Ephedrine Infusion with Rescue Ephedrine Boluses versus Rescue Boluses alone for Preventing Hypotension during Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery.","authors":"Mustafa Bajraktari, Blerim Arapi, G. Huti, Asead Abdyli, R. Domi","doi":"10.32391/ajtes.v7i1.315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Maternal hypotension is an unwanted consequence of the physiologic onset of spinal blockade, and causes both maternal and fetal effects. Maternal symptoms include nausea, vomiting, and a sense of ‘‘impending doom’’ from inadequate cerebral perfusion. Inadequate treatment of hypotension can ultimately end with the loss of consciousness and cardiovascular collapse. \nMaterials and methods: We included 80 full term parturient (ASA I or II) with uncomplicated pregnancies. The patients were prospectively randomized into two groups. 80 patients received 1000 mL NaCl 0,9 % solution before the initiation of spinal anesthesia.  Maternal systolic blood pressure was measured every 1 minutes (for first 10 minutes) and then every 3 minutes. One group received ephedrine infusion (1 mg/min) with rescue ephedrine boluses (10 mg), (usually defined as a maternal blood pressure ˂ 30% above baseline), (40 patients) and the other received rescue boluses alone (10 mg) , (usually defined as a maternal blood pressure ˂ 30% above baseline), (40 patients). \nResults: Gr 1 (Ephedrine infusion with rescue ephedrine boluses). The incidence of hypotension was at 8 patients (8/40 [20%]),(when an absolute value of less than 90 mmHg). \nGr 2 (rescue boluses ephedrine alone). The incidence of hypotension was at 32 patients (32/40 [80%]), (when an absolute value of less than 90 mmHg). \nGroup 2 had a higher incidence of hypotension compared with group 1 (32/40 [80%]) vs (8/40 [20%]). \nNeonatal outcomes were not different between the 2 groups. \nConclusion: Prophylactic variable rate ephedrine infusion and rescue ephedrine bolus dosing is more effective than relying on rescue ephedrine bolus dosing with respect to limiting clinician workload and maternal symptoms during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.Maternal hypotension","PeriodicalId":32905,"journal":{"name":"Albanian Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Albanian Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32391/ajtes.v7i1.315","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Maternal hypotension is an unwanted consequence of the physiologic onset of spinal blockade, and causes both maternal and fetal effects. Maternal symptoms include nausea, vomiting, and a sense of ‘‘impending doom’’ from inadequate cerebral perfusion. Inadequate treatment of hypotension can ultimately end with the loss of consciousness and cardiovascular collapse. Materials and methods: We included 80 full term parturient (ASA I or II) with uncomplicated pregnancies. The patients were prospectively randomized into two groups. 80 patients received 1000 mL NaCl 0,9 % solution before the initiation of spinal anesthesia.  Maternal systolic blood pressure was measured every 1 minutes (for first 10 minutes) and then every 3 minutes. One group received ephedrine infusion (1 mg/min) with rescue ephedrine boluses (10 mg), (usually defined as a maternal blood pressure ˂ 30% above baseline), (40 patients) and the other received rescue boluses alone (10 mg) , (usually defined as a maternal blood pressure ˂ 30% above baseline), (40 patients). Results: Gr 1 (Ephedrine infusion with rescue ephedrine boluses). The incidence of hypotension was at 8 patients (8/40 [20%]),(when an absolute value of less than 90 mmHg). Gr 2 (rescue boluses ephedrine alone). The incidence of hypotension was at 32 patients (32/40 [80%]), (when an absolute value of less than 90 mmHg). Group 2 had a higher incidence of hypotension compared with group 1 (32/40 [80%]) vs (8/40 [20%]). Neonatal outcomes were not different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Prophylactic variable rate ephedrine infusion and rescue ephedrine bolus dosing is more effective than relying on rescue ephedrine bolus dosing with respect to limiting clinician workload and maternal symptoms during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.Maternal hypotension
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
麻黄素输注联合抢救麻黄素与单独抢救麻黄素预防剖宫产腰麻期间低血压的比较。
背景:母体低血压是脊髓阻滞生理性发作的不良后果,并引起母体和胎儿的影响。产妇的症状包括恶心、呕吐和脑灌注不足造成的“末日来临”感。对低血压治疗不当最终会导致意识丧失和心血管衰竭。材料和方法:我们纳入了80例无并发症妊娠的足月产妇(ASA I或II)。这些患者被前瞻性地随机分为两组。80例患者在开始脊髓麻醉前给予1000 mL NaCl 0.9%溶液。产妇收缩压每1分钟测量一次(前10分钟),然后每3分钟测量一次。一组患者接受麻黄碱输注(1mg /min),同时给予麻黄碱救援丸(10mg)(通常定义为孕妇血压比基线高小于30%),(40例);另一组患者单独接受麻黄碱救援丸(10mg)(通常定义为孕妇血压比基线高小于30%),(40例)。结果:Gr 1(麻黄碱输注配合抢救麻黄碱丸)。低血压发生率为8例(8/40[20%]),(当绝对值小于90 mmHg时)。第2组(单独使用麻黄碱)。低血压发生率为32例(32/40[80%]),(当绝对值小于90 mmHg时)。2组低血压发生率高于1组(32/40 [80%]vs(8/40[20%])。两组新生儿结局无差异。结论:在限制剖宫产腰麻期间临床医生工作量和产妇症状方面,预防性麻黄素可变速率输注和救援麻黄素小丸比依赖救援麻黄素小丸更有效。产妇低血压
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Liver Abscess after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. A Case Report. Study Size Impact on Accuracy of the Worldwide Incidence of Pilonidal Sinus Management of Periarthritis Shoulder by Intra-Articular Steroid Injection and Shoulder Joint Manipulation Complications of Implantation of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Wernicke’s Encephalopathy from Hyperemesis Gravidarum. 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