Cargando…
What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study
BACKGROUND: Early utilisation of neuraxial anaesthesia has been recommended to reduce the need for general anaesthesia in obese parturients. The insertion and management of labour epidurals in obese women is not straight-forward. The aim of this pilot study was to compare the failure rate of extensi...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26231175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-015-0095-8 |
_version_ | 1782383919063105536 |
---|---|
author | Eley, Victoria A. van Zundert, Andre Callaway, Leonie |
author_facet | Eley, Victoria A. van Zundert, Andre Callaway, Leonie |
author_sort | Eley, Victoria A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Early utilisation of neuraxial anaesthesia has been recommended to reduce the need for general anaesthesia in obese parturients. The insertion and management of labour epidurals in obese women is not straight-forward. The aim of this pilot study was to compare the failure rate of extension of epidural analgesia for emergency caesarean section, in pregnant women with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 kg/m(2), to those with a BMI < 30 kg/m(2). The results will be used to calculate the sample size of a planned prospective study. METHODS: In this retrospective, (1:1) case–control pilot study, obese subjects and control subjects were selected from the obstetric database, if they delivered between January 2007 and December 2011. All subjects used epidural analgesia during labour and subsequently required anaesthesia for Category 1 or 2 Caesarean Section. Data was extracted from the patient medical record. Failure to extend was analysed using liberal and restrictive definitions. Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests were used to detect differences between groups. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine variables predictive of extension failure. RESULTS: There were 63 subjects in each group. The mean BMI of the obese group was 45.4 (5.8) kg/m(2) and 23.9 (3.0) kg/m(2) in the control group. The odds ratio for failure to extend the existing epidural blockade (liberal definition) was 2.48 (95 % CI:1.02 – 6.03) for the obese group compared with the control group (adjusted for age, parity and gestation). Using the restrictive definition, the odds ratio for failure in the obese group was 6.78 (95 % CI:1.43 – 32.2). The combination of respiratory co-morbidity and gestational diabetes significantly predicted extension failure. Surgical time and epidural complications on labour ward were significantly greater in the obese group. CONCLUSIONS: In this small retrospective cohort, patients with a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m(2) were significantly more likely to fail epidural extension for caesarean section. The presence of respiratory co-morbidity and gestational diabetes were significant predictors of extension failure; their clinical relevance requires further evaluation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4522121 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45221212015-08-02 What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study Eley, Victoria A. van Zundert, Andre Callaway, Leonie BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Early utilisation of neuraxial anaesthesia has been recommended to reduce the need for general anaesthesia in obese parturients. The insertion and management of labour epidurals in obese women is not straight-forward. The aim of this pilot study was to compare the failure rate of extension of epidural analgesia for emergency caesarean section, in pregnant women with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 kg/m(2), to those with a BMI < 30 kg/m(2). The results will be used to calculate the sample size of a planned prospective study. METHODS: In this retrospective, (1:1) case–control pilot study, obese subjects and control subjects were selected from the obstetric database, if they delivered between January 2007 and December 2011. All subjects used epidural analgesia during labour and subsequently required anaesthesia for Category 1 or 2 Caesarean Section. Data was extracted from the patient medical record. Failure to extend was analysed using liberal and restrictive definitions. Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests were used to detect differences between groups. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine variables predictive of extension failure. RESULTS: There were 63 subjects in each group. The mean BMI of the obese group was 45.4 (5.8) kg/m(2) and 23.9 (3.0) kg/m(2) in the control group. The odds ratio for failure to extend the existing epidural blockade (liberal definition) was 2.48 (95 % CI:1.02 – 6.03) for the obese group compared with the control group (adjusted for age, parity and gestation). Using the restrictive definition, the odds ratio for failure in the obese group was 6.78 (95 % CI:1.43 – 32.2). The combination of respiratory co-morbidity and gestational diabetes significantly predicted extension failure. Surgical time and epidural complications on labour ward were significantly greater in the obese group. CONCLUSIONS: In this small retrospective cohort, patients with a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m(2) were significantly more likely to fail epidural extension for caesarean section. The presence of respiratory co-morbidity and gestational diabetes were significant predictors of extension failure; their clinical relevance requires further evaluation. BioMed Central 2015-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4522121/ /pubmed/26231175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-015-0095-8 Text en © Eley et al. 2015 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Eley, Victoria A. van Zundert, Andre Callaway, Leonie What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title | What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title_full | What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title_fullStr | What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title_short | What is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
title_sort | what is the failure rate in extending labour analgesia in patients with a body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m(2)compared with patients with a body mass index < 30 kg/m(2)? a retrospective pilot study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26231175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-015-0095-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT eleyvictoriaa whatisthefailurerateinextendinglabouranalgesiainpatientswithabodymassindex40kgm2comparedwithpatientswithabodymassindex30kgm2aretrospectivepilotstudy AT vanzundertandre whatisthefailurerateinextendinglabouranalgesiainpatientswithabodymassindex40kgm2comparedwithpatientswithabodymassindex30kgm2aretrospectivepilotstudy AT callawayleonie whatisthefailurerateinextendinglabouranalgesiainpatientswithabodymassindex40kgm2comparedwithpatientswithabodymassindex30kgm2aretrospectivepilotstudy |