Andrea J. Fuller

Patient preferences for anesthesia outcomes associated with cesarean delivery

When deciding on neuraxial medication (e.g., spinal opioids) for cesarean delivery (CS) under regional anesthesia, anesthesiologists make treatment decisions that “trade off” relieving pain with the potential for increased risk of side effects. No previous studies have examined obstetric patients’ anesthesia preferences. Researchers administered 100 written surveys to pregnant women attending our institutions’ expectant parent class. We determined patients’ preferences for importance of specific intraoperative and postoperative anesthesia outcomes using priority ranking and relative value scales. We also explored patients’ fears, concerns, and tolerance regarding CS and analgesics. Eighty-two of 100 surveys were returned and analyzed. Pain during and after CS was the greatest concern followed by vomiting, nausea, cramping, pruritus, and shivering. Ranking and relative value scores were closely correlated (R2 = 0.7). Patients would tolerate a visual analog pain score (0–100 mm) of 56 ± 22 before exposing their baby to the potential effects of analgesics they receive. In contrast to previous general surgical population surveys that found nausea and vomiting as primary concerns, we found pain during and after CS as parturients’ most important concern. Common side effects such as pruritus and shivering caused only moderate concern. This information should be used to guide anesthetic choices, e.g., inclusion of spinal opioids given in adequate doses.

The Use of Postpartum Hemorrhage Protocols in United States Academic Obstetric Anesthesia Units

BACKGROUND:Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of severe maternal morbidity, cardiac arrest, and death during the hospitalization for childbirth. Protocol-driven care has been associated with improved outcomes in many settings; the National Partnership for Maternal Safety now recommends that PPH protocols be implemented in every labor and delivery unit in the United States. In this study, we sought to identify the level of PPH protocol availability in academic United States obstetric units. We hypothesized that the majority (>80%) of academic obstetric anesthesia units would have a PPH protocol in place. METHODS:A survey was developed by an expert panel. Domains included hospital characteristics, availability of PPH protocol or plans to develop such a protocol, and protocol components included in the upcoming National Partnership for Maternal Safety obstetric hemorrhage safety bundle initiative. The electronic survey was emailed to the 104 directors of United States academic obstetric anesthesia units. Responses were stratified by PPH protocol availability as appropriate. Univariate statistics were used to characterize survey responses and the probability distribution for PPH protocol availability was estimated using the binomial distribution. RESULTS:The survey response rate was 58%. The percentage of responding units with a PPH protocol was lower than hypothesized (P = 0.03); there was a PPH protocol in 67% of responding units (N = 40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 53%–78%). The median annual delivery volume for responding units with PPH protocol was 3900 vs 2300 for units without PPH protocol (P = 0.002), with no difference in cesarean delivery rate (P = 0.73) or observed PPH rate (P = 0.69). There was no difference in annual delivery volume between responding and nonresponding hospitals (P = 0.06), suggesting that academic centers with delivery volume >3200 births per year are more likely than smaller volume hospitals to have a PPH protocol in place (odds ratio 3.16 (95% CI: 1.01–9.90). Adjusting for delivery volume among nonresponding hospitals, we estimate that 67% (95% CI: 55%–77%) of all academic obstetric anesthesia units had a PPH protocol in place at the time of this survey. Institutional processes for escalation do not correlate with the presence of a PPH protocol. There was a massive transfusion protocol in 95% of units with a PPH protocol and in 90% of units without (95% CI of difference: −7% to 7%). A PPH code team or rapid response team was available in 57% of responding institutions, with no difference between units with or without a PPH protocol [mean difference 4%, 95% CI (−24% to 32%)]. CONCLUSIONS:Despite increasing emphasis on national quality improvement in patient safety, there are no PPH protocols in at least 20% of U.S. academic obstetric anesthesia units. Delivery volume is the most important variable predicting the presence of a PPH protocol. National efforts to ensure universal presence of a PPH protocol in all academic centers will achieve the greatest impact by focusing on small-volume facilities. Future work is needed to evaluate and facilitate PPH implementation in nonacademic obstetric units.

Experimental heat pain for detecting pregnancy-induced analgesia in humans.

Animal studies suggest that increased circulating estrogen and progesterone, and activation of the endorphin system cause prenancy-induced antinociceptive effects. Human studies have provided inconsistent results and have often lacked a nonpregnant control group. In this study, we compared sensitivity to experimental heat and cold pain in pregnant and nonpregnant women. Nineteen healthy nonpregnant female volunteers and 20 pregnant women at term were enrolled. Pain threshold and tolerance were examined using experimental heat-induced pain and cold pressor pain models. Subjects were evaluated pre- and 1–2 days post-delivery (pregnant), or on consecutive days (nonpregnant). Heat pain tolerance was significantly increased in the pregnant women during pre and postdelivery when compared with nonpregnant controls (50.0 ± 1.0 vs 49.0 ± 1.2 and 50.1 ± 0.7 vs 49.2 ± 1.2°C; mean ± sd). However, pain induced by the cold pressor test was endured for a similar amount of time by both study groups. Pregnancy-induced analgesic effects at term can be detected in a model of experimental heat pain. These effects persist during the first 24–48 h after delivery. Experimental heat pain is a suitable modality for further characterizing the phenomenon of pregnancy-induced analgesia in humans.

Valdecoxib for postoperative pain management after cesarean delivery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Although nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) improve postoperative pain relief after cesarean delivery, they carry potential side effects (e.g., bleeding). Perioperative cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors show similar analgesic efficacy to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in many surgical models but have not been studied after cesarean delivery. We designed this randomized double-blind study to determine the analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effects of valdecoxib after cesarean delivery. Healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were randomized to receive oral valdecoxib 20 mg or placebo every 12 h for 72 h postoperatively. As a result of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors safety concerns that became apparent during this study, the study was terminated early after evaluating 48 patients. We found no differences in total analgesic consumption between the valdecoxib and placebo groups (121 ± 70 versus 143 ± 77 morphine mg-equivalents, respectively; P = 0.26). Pain at rest and during activity were similar between the groups despite adequate post hoc power to have detected a clinically significant difference. There were also no differences in IV morphine requirements, time to first analgesic request, patient satisfaction, side effects, breast-feeding success, or functional activity. Postoperative pain was generally well controlled. Adding valdecoxib after cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine is not supported at this time.

Blood product replacement for postpartum hemorrhage.

Hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion is a common occurrence in obstetrics. This article reviews each step in the transfusion process, including laboratory preparation of blood, indications for various blood components, complications of blood transfusion, massive transfusion, and alternatives to homologous blood. Current thinking regarding transfusion-related acute lung injury, transfusion-related immunomodulation, early use of plasma for massive transfusion, and the use of adjuvant agents such as activated recombinant factor VII are also discussed.

Analgesic requirements and postoperative recovery after scheduled compared to unplanned cesarean delivery: a retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND Studies examining the effects of various analgesics and anesthetics on postoperative pain following cesarean delivery conventionally use the scheduled cesarean population. This study compares postoperative analgesic requirements and recovery profiles in women undergoing scheduled cesarean compared to unplanned cesarean delivery following labor. We postulated that unplanned cesarean deliveries may increase postoperative analgesic requirements. METHODS We conducted a retrospective chart review of 200 cesarean deliveries at Lucile Packard Childrens Hospital, California. We examined the records of 100 patients who underwent scheduled cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia (hyperbaric bupivacaine 12 mg with intrathecal fentanyl 10 microg and morphine 200 microg) and 100 patients that following a trail of labor required unplanned cesarean under epidural anesthesia (10-25 mL 2% lidocaine top-up with epidural morphine 4 mg after clamping of the umbilical cord). We recorded pain scores, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, side effects, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS We found no differences in postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption between scheduled and unplanned cesarean deliveries for up to five days postoperatively. There were no differences in treatment of side effects such as nausea, vomiting, or pruritus (P>0.05). CONCLUSION The results indicate that women experience similar pain and analgesic requirements after scheduled compared to unplanned cesarean delivery. This suggests that the non-scheduled cesarean population may be a suitable pain model to study pain management strategies; and that alterations in pain management are not necessary for the unplanned cesarean delivery population.