Influence of anesthesia technique at cesarean section on newborn state assessment and on uterus contraction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15587/2313-8416.2015.50225Keywords:
anesthesia, cesarean section, Apgar score, uterotonic remedies, sevoflurane, regional anesthesiaAbstract
Anesthetics and anesthesia in whole have an influence on intrauterine state of fetus. All substances that are injected to a pregnant for anesthesia penetrate in organism of fetus in some quantity. It is considered that halogened inhalation anesthetics can moderate the birth activity of uterus and its tonus in quiescence depending on concentration.
Aim of research: to study the techniques of anesthesia (inhalation, total intravenous, spinal) of cesarean section for assess the state of newborn and uterus contraction.
Materials and methods. There were examined 95 women on term of pregnancy 37–42 weeks in 2013–2014 years who underwent cesarean section. They were divided into 3 groups depending on technique of anesthesia. I group (n=30) included women who underwent inhalation anesthesia. The second one (n=34) included women who underwent the total intravenous anesthesia. The third group – the random women (n=31) who underwent the spinal anesthesia. The state of newborns was detected on Apgar score on 1 and 5 minutes after birth. The quality of postnatal uterus contraction was assessed depending on the need of an amount of injected oxytocin and necessity to add another uterotonic preparation after fetus extraction.
Results and discussion. At analysis of the state of newborn on Apgar score on 1 minute in 1 group were received 7,73±0,09 point, in 2 group this indicator was 7,4±0,14 point without statistic difference with 1 group (р=0,06). In 3 group points reached 7,55±0,17, without statistic difference with both (р=0,36), and 2 groups (р=0,50). At analysis of the state of newborn on Apgar on 5 minute statistic difference between the groups also was not established. In the 1 group this indicator reached 8,69±0,9 point, in 2 group – 8,47±0,12point, the difference with the first group was unreliable (р=0,16). In 3 group an assessment on Apgar on 5 minute was 8,64±0,12, without statistic difference with 1 and 2 groups (р=0,76 and р=0,30, respectively). Women of all groups received intraoperatively 10 MO oxytocin (р=1,0). In 1 group the second uterotonic preparation was prescribed to3,3 % women. In 2 group the second uterotonic preparation was prescribed to 5,9 % women, and in 3 group – to 12,9 % patients. The difference between groups was unreliable (р=0,76). The correlative analysis did not reveal connection between the technique of anesthesia and prescription of uterotonics (r=0,029; р=0,84).
Conclusions. The technique of anesthesia for cesarean section has no influence on assessment of the state of newborns on Apgar score neither on 1 minute nor on the 5 one after birth. No one of studied techniques of anesthesia doesn’t influence on postnatal uterus contraction and doesn’t lead to an additional prescription of uterotonic preparations
References
Klіnіchnij protokol z akushers'koї dopomogi «Kesarіv roztin». Nakaz Mіnіsterstva ohoroni zdorov'ja Ukraїni №977 vіd 27.12.2011 r. Pro vnesennja zmіn do nakazu MOZ Ukrainy vіd 15.12.2003 roku N 582 "Pro zatverdzhennja klіnіchnih protokolіv z akushers'koy ta gіnekologіchnoї dopomogi". Available at: http://moz.gov.ua/ua/portal/dn_20031215_582.html
Thomas, J., Paranjothy, S. (2010). RCOG Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. The National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. London: RCOG press, 101.
Bowring, J., Fraser, N., Vause, S., Heazell, A. E. P. (2006). Is regional anaesthesia better than general anaesthesia for caesarean section? Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 26 (5), 433–434. doi: 10.1080/01443610600720345
Shlapak, I. P. (Ed.) (2013). Anestezіologіja ta іntensivna terapіja: pіdruchnik dlja lіkarіv-іnternіv ta sluhachіv vishhih navchal'nih zakladіv ІІІ-ІV rіvnіv akreditacіi ta zakladіv pіsljadiplomnoi osvіti. Vol. 1 [Anesthesiology and Intensive Care]. Kyiv: NickPrint, 550.
Makatsariya, A. D. (Ed.) (2011). Trombogemorragicheskie oslozhnenija v akushersko-ginekologicheskoj praktike: Rukovodstvo dlja vrachej. [Thrombohemorrhagic complications in obstetric practice]. Moscow: Medical News Agency Ltd, 1056.
Dolina, O. A. (Еd.) (2006). Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 576.
Hadavi, S. M., Allahyary, E., Asadi, S. (2013). Evaluation of the adequacy of general anesthesia in cesarean section by bispectral index. IranJMedSci, 38 (3), 240–247.
Ueyama, H. (2010). Controversial issues regarding general anesthesia for cesarean section. Masui, 59 (3), 357–361.
Mukaka, M. M. (2012). Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med. J., 24 (3), 69–71.
Rudick, V., Galon, A., Niv, D., Leykin, Y., Baram, A., Geller, E., Peyser, M. R. (1985). Anesthetic management of 646 consecutive cesarean section cases. Isr. J. Med. Sci., 21 (1), 18–21.
Gori, F., Pasqualucci, A., Corradetti, F., Milli, M., Peduto, V. A. (2007). Maternal and neonatal outcome after cesarean section: The impact of anesthesia. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 20 (1), 53–57. doi: 10.1080/14767050601134645
Afolabi, B. B., Lesi, F. E. (2012). Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev, 10. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004350.pub3
Yoo, K. Y., Jeong, C. W., Park, B. Y., Kim, S. J., Jeong, S. T., Shin, M. H., Lee, J. (2009). Effects of remifentanil on cardiovascular and bispectral index responses to endotracheal intubation in severe pre-eclamptic patients undergoing Caesarean delivery under general anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 102 (6), 812–819. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep099
Yamakage, M., Tsujiguchi, N., Chen, X., Kamada, Y., Namiki, A. (2002). Sevoflurane inhibits contraction of uterine smooth muscle from pregnant rats similarly to halothane and isoflurane. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal Canadien D’anesthésie, 49 (1), 62–66. doi: 10.1007/bf03020420
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Олексій Олегович Волков
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our journal abides by the Creative Commons CC BY copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons CC BY, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.
