Cargando…

General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE: The choice of anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery (CD) is one of the most important choices to make in obstetric anesthesia. In this study, we examine which type of anesthesia was used for emergency CD in our hospital, and how the choice affected the time from entry to the operatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wiskott, Kenas, Jebrin, Raed, Ioscovich, Daniel, Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina, Tevet, Aharon, Shatalin, Daniel, Ioscovich, Alexander
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sciendo 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8158321/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34056127
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2020-0012
_version_ 1783699861213806592
author Wiskott, Kenas
Jebrin, Raed
Ioscovich, Daniel
Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
Tevet, Aharon
Shatalin, Daniel
Ioscovich, Alexander
author_facet Wiskott, Kenas
Jebrin, Raed
Ioscovich, Daniel
Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
Tevet, Aharon
Shatalin, Daniel
Ioscovich, Alexander
author_sort Wiskott, Kenas
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The choice of anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery (CD) is one of the most important choices to make in obstetric anesthesia. In this study, we examine which type of anesthesia was used for emergency CD in our hospital, and how the choice affected the time from entry to the operation room until incision (TTI), time until delivery (TTD), and maternal/neonatal outcomes. METHODS: Retrospectively, we examined all emergency CD’s performed in Shaare Zedek Medical Center between January–December 2018. Results: 1059 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 7.7% underwent general anesthesia (GA), 36.2% – conversion from labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia, 52% – spinal anesthesia and 4.1% – combined spinal epidural. We did not find a significant difference between the GA and conversion epidural groups in terms of TTI or TTD. Nevertheless, GA was found to be correlated to a high rate of blood-products requirement and ICU admission. The rate of newborns with an APGAR score of less than 7, in both first and fifth second after birth, was significantly higher in the GA group, as well as the need for NICU admission. CONCLUSION: This study clearly emphasizes that the TTI are shortest when using GA or conversion of labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia. Meanwhile, GA is also linked to higher rates of admissions to ICU as well as poorer neonatal outcomes compared to the other groups. Additionally, our study uncovered a low rate of GA, and relatively low rate of regional anesthesia failure, which meets the accepted standards.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8158321
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Sciendo
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81583212021-05-28 General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study Wiskott, Kenas Jebrin, Raed Ioscovich, Daniel Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina Tevet, Aharon Shatalin, Daniel Ioscovich, Alexander Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care Original Paper OBJECTIVE: The choice of anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery (CD) is one of the most important choices to make in obstetric anesthesia. In this study, we examine which type of anesthesia was used for emergency CD in our hospital, and how the choice affected the time from entry to the operation room until incision (TTI), time until delivery (TTD), and maternal/neonatal outcomes. METHODS: Retrospectively, we examined all emergency CD’s performed in Shaare Zedek Medical Center between January–December 2018. Results: 1059 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 7.7% underwent general anesthesia (GA), 36.2% – conversion from labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia, 52% – spinal anesthesia and 4.1% – combined spinal epidural. We did not find a significant difference between the GA and conversion epidural groups in terms of TTI or TTD. Nevertheless, GA was found to be correlated to a high rate of blood-products requirement and ICU admission. The rate of newborns with an APGAR score of less than 7, in both first and fifth second after birth, was significantly higher in the GA group, as well as the need for NICU admission. CONCLUSION: This study clearly emphasizes that the TTI are shortest when using GA or conversion of labor epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia. Meanwhile, GA is also linked to higher rates of admissions to ICU as well as poorer neonatal outcomes compared to the other groups. Additionally, our study uncovered a low rate of GA, and relatively low rate of regional anesthesia failure, which meets the accepted standards. Sciendo 2020-12 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8158321/ /pubmed/34056127 http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2020-0012 Text en © 2020 Kenas Wiskott et al.. published by Sciendo https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Wiskott, Kenas
Jebrin, Raed
Ioscovich, Daniel
Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
Tevet, Aharon
Shatalin, Daniel
Ioscovich, Alexander
General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_fullStr General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_short General Versus Regional Anesthesia for Emergency Cesarean Delivery in a High-volume High-resource Referral Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_sort general versus regional anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery in a high-volume high-resource referral center: a retrospective cohort study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8158321/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34056127
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2020-0012
work_keys_str_mv AT wiskottkenas generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT jebrinraed generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT ioscovichdaniel generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT grisarugranovskysorina generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT tevetaharon generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT shatalindaniel generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy
AT ioscovichalexander generalversusregionalanesthesiaforemergencycesareandeliveryinahighvolumehighresourcereferralcenteraretrospectivecohortstudy