BACKGROUND: Obese parturients are at high risk of complications during anaesthesia and early use of epidural analgesia in labour has been recommended for obese patients during labour. AIM: To assess the outcome of anaesthesia outpatient consultation for obese parturients. METHODS: We retrospectively compared outcomes of obese patients antenatally and an obese and non-obese control group over a 1-year period. Outcomes included potential airway problems, anaesthetic for caesarean section, use and success of epidural analgesia and cervical dilation at epidural placement. RESULTS: The proportion of obese patients who had predictable intubation difficulty was low (5%). Epidural use analgesia in labour (69 vs 36 vs 66%, P = 0.148) was similar between groups (obese, obese controls and non-obese controls, respectively). Cervical dilation at the time of epidural insertion in the obese group (2.0, 1.0-3.0 cm) was not different from obese controls (3.0, 1.75-5.75 cm). There was no difference in the number of attempts required to site the epidural between groups or the number of patients that required resiting of the epidural catheter. General anaesthesia was not required in any emergency case in this group. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of obese patients attending the anaesthetic clinic were mixed. Not all patients who were to advised have epidurals did so but those who did requested them in early labour and there was no requirement for general anaesthesia during emergency caesarean section and adverse airway events were avoided in this group.
BACKGROUND:Obese parturients are at high risk of complications during anaesthesia and early use of epidural analgesia in labour has been recommended for obesepatients during labour. AIM: To assess the outcome of anaesthesia outpatient consultation for obese parturients. METHODS: We retrospectively compared outcomes of obesepatients antenatally and an obese and non-obese control group over a 1-year period. Outcomes included potential airway problems, anaesthetic for caesarean section, use and success of epidural analgesia and cervical dilation at epidural placement. RESULTS: The proportion of obesepatients who had predictable intubation difficulty was low (5%). Epidural use analgesia in labour (69 vs 36 vs 66%, P = 0.148) was similar between groups (obese, obese controls and non-obese controls, respectively). Cervical dilation at the time of epidural insertion in the obese group (2.0, 1.0-3.0 cm) was not different from obese controls (3.0, 1.75-5.75 cm). There was no difference in the number of attempts required to site the epidural between groups or the number of patients that required resiting of the epidural catheter. General anaesthesia was not required in any emergency case in this group. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of obesepatients attending the anaesthetic clinic were mixed. Not all patients who were to advised have epidurals did so but those who did requested them in early labour and there was no requirement for general anaesthesia during emergency caesarean section and adverse airway events were avoided in this group.
Authors: Gregory A L Davies; Cynthia Maxwell; Lynne McLeod; Robert Gagnon; Melanie Basso; Hayley Bos; Marie-France Delisle; Dan Farine; Lynda Hudon; Savas Menticoglou; William Mundle; Lynn Murphy-Kaulbeck; Annie Ouellet; Tracy Pressey; Anne Roggensack; Dean Leduc; Charlotte Ballerman; Anne Biringer; Louise Duperron; Donna Jones; Lily Shek-Yun Lee; Debra Shepherd; Kathleen Wilson Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.561