Literature DB >> 15676316

Retrospective review of spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section in preeclamptic patients.

C L Chiu1, M Mansor, K P Ng, Y K Chan.   

Abstract

A 5-year retrospective survey of anaesthesia for caesarean section for mild/moderate and severe preeclampsia was performed, covering the period between 1 January 1996 and 31 December 2000. One hundred and twenty-one cases of non-labouring preeclamptic patients receiving spinal or epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section were included for analysis. Comparisons were made of the lowest blood pressures recorded before induction of anaesthesia, during the period from induction to delivery and the period from delivery to the end of operation. The decreases in blood pressure were similar after spinal and epidural anaesthesia. The use of intravenous fluids and ephedrine were also comparable in the two anaesthetic groups. There was no difference in maternal or neonatal outcome. Our result supports the use of spinal anaesthesia in preeclamptic women.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 15676316     DOI: 10.1016/s0959-289x(02)00137-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth        ISSN: 0959-289X            Impact factor:   2.603


  4 in total

Review 1.  Regional anaesthesia in pre-eclampsia: advantages and disadvantages.

Authors:  Nanda Gopal Mandal; Sridhar Surapaneni
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  A retrospective study of the outcome of cesarean section for women with severe pre-eclampsia in a third world setting.

Authors:  Obinna V Ajuzieogu; Humphrey Azubuike Ezike; Adaobi Obianuju Amucheazi; Jamike Enwereji
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2011-01

3.  Subarachnoid block for caesarean section in severe preeclampsia.

Authors:  Sujata Chaudhary; Rashmi Salhotra
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-04

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

Authors:  Chu Cheng; Alan Hsi-Wen Liao; Chien-Yu Chen; Yu-Cih Lin; Yi-No Kang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.