T K Allen1, H A Muir, R B George, A S Habib. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intravenous fluids and vasopressors are used for managing spinal-induced hypotension during cesarean delivery, but the choice of vasopressor and the type and timing of fluid administration remain controversial. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of all members of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology between February and March 2007 to determine their preferences for preventing and treating spinal-induced hypotension with respect to fluid and vasopressor administration. RESULTS: The response rate was 292/746 (39%). Fifty percent worked in academic institutions and 56% had >50% of their clinical responsibility to obstetric anesthesia. For prophylaxis, 35% used fluid preloading, 30% fluid preloading with vasopressors, and 12% fluid co-loading with vasopressors. Of those using vasopressors for prophylaxis, 32% used ephedrine, 26% used phenylephrine, and 33% based their choice on heart rate. For treatment, 32% used ephedrine, 23% used phenylephrine, and 41% used either agent based on heart rate. Anesthesiologists in academic practice were less likely to use fluid preloading only (P=0.028) and more likely to use fluid co-loading and vasopressors (P=0.003). They were also more likely to administer phenylephrine for prophylaxis compared with those in private practice (P=0.042). CONCLUSION: Significant variations in practice exist in the prevention and treatment of spinal-induced hypotension. Fluid preloading and the prophylaxis and treatment of hypotension with ephedrine continue to be common practices.
BACKGROUND: Intravenous fluids and vasopressors are used for managing spinal-induced hypotension during cesarean delivery, but the choice of vasopressor and the type and timing of fluid administration remain controversial. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of all members of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology between February and March 2007 to determine their preferences for preventing and treating spinal-induced hypotension with respect to fluid and vasopressor administration. RESULTS: The response rate was 292/746 (39%). Fifty percent worked in academic institutions and 56% had >50% of their clinical responsibility to obstetric anesthesia. For prophylaxis, 35% used fluid preloading, 30% fluid preloading with vasopressors, and 12% fluid co-loading with vasopressors. Of those using vasopressors for prophylaxis, 32% used ephedrine, 26% used phenylephrine, and 33% based their choice on heart rate. For treatment, 32% used ephedrine, 23% used phenylephrine, and 41% used either agent based on heart rate. Anesthesiologists in academic practice were less likely to use fluid preloading only (P=0.028) and more likely to use fluid co-loading and vasopressors (P=0.003). They were also more likely to administer phenylephrine for prophylaxis compared with those in private practice (P=0.042). CONCLUSION: Significant variations in practice exist in the prevention and treatment of spinal-induced hypotension. Fluid preloading and the prophylaxis and treatment of hypotension with ephedrine continue to be common practices.
Authors: Mahmoud M Almustafa; Abdelkareem S Al-Oweidi; Khaled R Al-Zaben; Ibraheem Y Qudaisat; Sami Abu-Halaweh; Subhi M Alghanem; Islam M Massad; Walid Samarah; Reem A Al-Shaer; Said Ismail; Fawaz Khazawla Journal: Ann Saudi Med Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.526