OBJECTIVE: In this study, the effects of anaesthetic technique on mother and newborn were investigated in a retrospective analysis of parturients with cardiac diseases undergoing Caesarean section between 2006-2012. METHODS: Our hospital's medical information system records were analyzed, and we found 107 parturients with cardiac disease and were undergoing Caesarean section, and their demographic data and obstetric, anaesthetic, and neonatal record forms were inspected. RESULTS: Fifty-three (49.5%) pregnant women received general anaesthesia, and 54 (50.5%) received regional anaesthesia (34 spinal, 19 epidural and 1 CSE) (p=0.05). Week of pregnancy was lower for the group of general anaesthesia (p=0.007). Among cardiac parturients, valvular lesion rates were higher (75.7%). The relationship between existing cardiac disease and anaesthetic management was not significant (p=0.28). However, we determined that parturients with higher NYHA (New York Heart Association) classifications had higher general anaesthesia rates. (p=0.001). A rate of 39% of 74 NYHA I patients were undergoing general anaesthesia; this rate was 64% for NYHA II and 100% for NYHA III. The patients with cardiac surgery or medical treatment history had higher general anaesthesia rates (p=0.009). Although the general anaesthesia group newborn weights were lower (p=0.03), there was no difference between groups for APGAR scores. With regard to postoperative complications and hospital stay, the groups were similar. CONCLUSION: We determined that general and epidural rates in parturients with cardiac diseases were similar, general anaesthesia was preferred for parturients who had higher NYHA classifications and surgical or medical treatment history. We considered that general anaesthesia criteria should reduce the anaesthesia management of parturients with cardiac disease; epidural or CSE anaesthesia applications should increase according to the patient's physical state, haemodynamic parameters, and obstetric indications.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, the effects of anaesthetic technique on mother and newborn were investigated in a retrospective analysis of parturients with cardiac diseases undergoing Caesarean section between 2006-2012. METHODS: Our hospital's medical information system records were analyzed, and we found 107 parturients with cardiac disease and were undergoing Caesarean section, and their demographic data and obstetric, anaesthetic, and neonatal record forms were inspected. RESULTS: Fifty-three (49.5%) pregnant women received general anaesthesia, and 54 (50.5%) received regional anaesthesia (34 spinal, 19 epidural and 1 CSE) (p=0.05). Week of pregnancy was lower for the group of general anaesthesia (p=0.007). Among cardiac parturients, valvular lesion rates were higher (75.7%). The relationship between existing cardiac disease and anaesthetic management was not significant (p=0.28). However, we determined that parturients with higher NYHA (New York Heart Association) classifications had higher general anaesthesia rates. (p=0.001). A rate of 39% of 74 NYHA I patients were undergoing general anaesthesia; this rate was 64% for NYHA II and 100% for NYHA III. The patients with cardiac surgery or medical treatment history had higher general anaesthesia rates (p=0.009). Although the general anaesthesia group newborn weights were lower (p=0.03), there was no difference between groups for APGAR scores. With regard to postoperative complications and hospital stay, the groups were similar. CONCLUSION: We determined that general and epidural rates in parturients with cardiac diseases were similar, general anaesthesia was preferred for parturients who had higher NYHA classifications and surgical or medical treatment history. We considered that general anaesthesia criteria should reduce the anaesthesia management of parturients with cardiac disease; epidural or CSE anaesthesia applications should increase according to the patient's physical state, haemodynamic parameters, and obstetric indications.
Authors: Peter J Leary; Sarah E S Leary; Karen K Stout; Stephen M Schwartz; Thomas R Easterling Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 7.661