Cargando…

Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study

Before 2013, almost none of the cesarean section (CS) deliveries at our institution were performed with spinal anesthesia (SA), but after 2013 SA became the first-choice anesthesia for CS because it achieved better neonatal outcomes. However, the current rate of SA implementation at our institution...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sugo, Yuki, Kubota, Mirei, Niwa, Hidetomo, Hirota, Kazuyoshi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7794365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33420309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80666-7
_version_ 1783634191306457088
author Sugo, Yuki
Kubota, Mirei
Niwa, Hidetomo
Hirota, Kazuyoshi
author_facet Sugo, Yuki
Kubota, Mirei
Niwa, Hidetomo
Hirota, Kazuyoshi
author_sort Sugo, Yuki
collection PubMed
description Before 2013, almost none of the cesarean section (CS) deliveries at our institution were performed with spinal anesthesia (SA), but after 2013 SA became the first-choice anesthesia for CS because it achieved better neonatal outcomes. However, the current rate of SA implementation at our institution was estimated to be approx. 60–70%, which is intermediate between these at other institutions in Japan or in other countries. This raises a question: What rate of SA use among CS cases achieves the best neonatal outcomes? To answer this question, we conducted this single-center case–control study with 1326 CS cases between 1994 and 2017 and compared the neonatal outcomes before to those after 2013. The logistic regression models were prepared to estimate the risk of birth asphyxia defined as a 5-min Apgar of < 7, associated with eight potential confounders, including the modified anesthetic protocol. The modified protocol was not a significant independent factor for neonatal asphyxia, indicating that our moderate SA priority protocol did not improve the neonatal outcomes even when compared to the outcomes at a 0% SA rate. A > 70% rate of SA implementation may be needed to provide better neonatal outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7794365
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77943652021-01-11 Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study Sugo, Yuki Kubota, Mirei Niwa, Hidetomo Hirota, Kazuyoshi Sci Rep Article Before 2013, almost none of the cesarean section (CS) deliveries at our institution were performed with spinal anesthesia (SA), but after 2013 SA became the first-choice anesthesia for CS because it achieved better neonatal outcomes. However, the current rate of SA implementation at our institution was estimated to be approx. 60–70%, which is intermediate between these at other institutions in Japan or in other countries. This raises a question: What rate of SA use among CS cases achieves the best neonatal outcomes? To answer this question, we conducted this single-center case–control study with 1326 CS cases between 1994 and 2017 and compared the neonatal outcomes before to those after 2013. The logistic regression models were prepared to estimate the risk of birth asphyxia defined as a 5-min Apgar of < 7, associated with eight potential confounders, including the modified anesthetic protocol. The modified protocol was not a significant independent factor for neonatal asphyxia, indicating that our moderate SA priority protocol did not improve the neonatal outcomes even when compared to the outcomes at a 0% SA rate. A > 70% rate of SA implementation may be needed to provide better neonatal outcomes. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7794365/ /pubmed/33420309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80666-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Sugo, Yuki
Kubota, Mirei
Niwa, Hidetomo
Hirota, Kazuyoshi
Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title_full Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title_fullStr Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title_full_unstemmed Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title_short Moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? A case–control study
title_sort moderate rate of implementation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: does it improve neonatal well-being? a case–control study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7794365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33420309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80666-7
work_keys_str_mv AT sugoyuki moderaterateofimplementationofspinalanesthesiaforcesareansectiondoesitimproveneonatalwellbeingacasecontrolstudy
AT kubotamirei moderaterateofimplementationofspinalanesthesiaforcesareansectiondoesitimproveneonatalwellbeingacasecontrolstudy
AT niwahidetomo moderaterateofimplementationofspinalanesthesiaforcesareansectiondoesitimproveneonatalwellbeingacasecontrolstudy
AT hirotakazuyoshi moderaterateofimplementationofspinalanesthesiaforcesareansectiondoesitimproveneonatalwellbeingacasecontrolstudy