Comparison of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery in Patients with Severe Preeclampsia

Moslemi, Farnaz; Rasooli, Susan

doi:10.3923/jms.2007.1044.1048

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 11 RCTs and a prospective nonrandomized controlled trial recruited a total of 782 women with PE from Canada 29 , India 21 , 22 , 32 , Iran 26 , the Republic of Macedonia 28 , Russia 23 – 25 , South Africa 8 , Thailand 16 , the United Kingdom 27 , and the United States 13 , 30 , 31 between 1980 and 2015. The mean age of the women ranged from 18.8 to 32 years.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, data on adverse events were reported in five studies (n=331) 21 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 . Three of them compared general anaesthesia with SA 21 , 26 , one of them compared SA with EA 27 , and the other two studies compared general anaesthesia with EA (Appendix 11 ) 29 , 30 . Pooled estimates showed that general anaesthesia had significantly higher adverse event than SA did (RR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.16–3.47), but no difference in maternal adverse event existed in other comparisons (Appendix 12 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration (APGAR) score and resuscitation are two critical neonatal outcomes during delivery, only seven of the included studies reported APGAR scores (n = 479) 21 , 22 , 25 – 27 , 29 , 32 . Five of them compared general anaesthesia with SA 21 , 22 , 26 , 32 , two of them compared SA with EA 27 , 32 , and other studies compared general anaesthesia with EA 29 , 32 . Both of 5-min APGAR scores (Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review with network meta-analysis on mono strategy of anaesthesia for preeclampsia in caesarean section

Cheng

Liao

Chen

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to reveal the effects of anaesthesia strategies on maternal mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, vasopressor consumption, adverse events, and neonatal resuscitation when women with preeclampsia (PE) undergo caesarean section (CS). Three major databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective controlled studies (PCSs). Two authors independently screened, extracted, and checked eligibility and outcome data. Outcomes involved MAP, vasopressor use, maternal adverse events, APGAR scores, and neonatal resuscitation. Pooled estimates were carried out by contrast-based network meta-analysis, and pooled effect sizes were presented with 95% confidence interval (CI). Eleven RCTs and one PCS (n = 782) formed three-node network meta-analysis, and non-significant differences were observed in MAP, 5-min APGAR score, and neonatal intubation rate among the three anaesthesia strategies. General anaesthesia had significantly lower vasopressor consumption than spinal anaesthesia did (standardised mean difference = − 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: − 1.76 to − 0.63), but it had higher maternal adverse event rate (risk ratio = 2.00, 95% CI 1.16–3.47). Because no optimal anaesthesia strategy has been shown to achieve a balanced maternal and neonatal outcome, therefore a shared decision-making process may be required regarding the most suitable choice of anaesthetic strategy for individual preeclamptic mother undergoing CS. Future larger studies may need to focus on evaluating the role of vasopressors on maternal hemodynamic as well as factors affecting maternal outcomes for different anaesthetic techniques in preeclamptic women undergoing CS.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review with network meta-analysis on mono strategy of anaesthesia for preeclampsia in caesarean section

Cheng

Liao

Chen

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…133,[135][136][137] When spinal anesthesia is compared with GA, RCTs report equivocal findings for 1-and 5-min Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH values (Category A1-E evidence). 132,[138][139][140][141][142] RCTs also are equivocal regarding total time in the operating room when epidural 135,137,140,143,144 or spinal 144,145 anesthesia is compared with GA (Category A2-E evidence).…”

Section: Anesthetic Care For Cesarean Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%