Search

Neuraxial anaesthesia offers the most effective form of obstetric pain relief and is superior to other methods of analgesia, and it does not increase the risk of caesarean section. In daily practice, various techniques are used including the options of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and combined spinal epidural analgesia (CSEA). Risk information is one of the prerequisites for 'informed consent'. Omitting the epidural test dose and using low-dose local anaesthetics with lipophilic opioids enhances early mobilisation.

Unlabelled: Ropivacaine might be superior to bupivcaine for epidural labour analgesia because it appears to induce less lower extremity motor blockade. The clinical relevance of this difference is not yet clear., Methods: In a double-blind randomised trial bupivacaine and ropivacaine each at 0.125% with 1 microg/ml fentanyl were compared for epidural labour analgesia. This study was performed in two university hospitals., Results: Sixty-three nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies at term were included. There were no differences between bupivacaine and ropivacaine as far as motor blockade, analgesic outcome, mode of delivery and neonatal outcome are concerned. However, the clinical management of epidural analgesia differed significantly between the two institutions involved. Parturients of one institution had their epidural catheter placed earlier, needed less top-up medication, and had more successful mobilisations, when compared to the other institution., Conclusions: Institutional clinical practice can be significantly different. Pharmacological differences between bupivacaine and ropivacaine at 0.125% with 1 microg/ml fentanyl seem to be less important than differences between institutions in terms of clinical practice.

Spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section has gained widespread acceptance. We assessed the impact of spinal anaesthesia and body mass index (BMI) on spirometric performance. In this prospective study, we consecutively assessed 71 consenting parturients receiving spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine and fentanyl for elective Caesarean section. We performed spirometry during the antepartum visit (baseline), immediately after spinal anaesthesia, 10-20 min, 1 h, 2 h after the operation, and after mobilisation (3 h). Baseline values were within normal ranges. There was a significant decrease in all spirometric parameters after effective spinal anaesthesia that persisted throughout the study period. The decrease in respiratory function was significantly greater in obese (BMI > 30 kg x m(-2)) than in normal-weight parturients (BMI < 25 kg x m(-2)), e.g. median (IQR) vital capacity directly after spinal anaesthesia; -24 (-16 to -31)% vs. -11 (-6 to -16)%, p < 0.001 and recovery was significantly slower. We conclude that both spinal anaesthesia and obesity significantly impair respiratory function in parturients.

Peripartum care of parturients has contributed a great deal to the development of modern anaesthesia during the past 150 years. The introduction of general and regional anaesthesia provided new options of relieving pain during delivery and preventing suffering. However,provision of effective labor analgesia gave and still gives rise to controversy as to whether interfering with natural events such as delivery was justifiable on a religious,moral or ideological level. A new era of obstetric pain relief was initiated when a study design was devised to define the Minimum Local Analgesic Concentration (MLAC) needed for epidural analgesia. Using the MLAC model as a scientifically based pharmacodynamic measure of analgesia, empirically developed "recipes" can be compared and validated. The importance of this clinical model will be put into a pharmacological context including issues such as the up-down sequential allocation technique, dose-response curves and differential nerve blockade.

Question: This survey investigated the common practice of obstetric analgesia and anaesthesia in Swiss hospitals and evaluated the influence of the Swiss interest group for obstetric anaesthesia., Methods: In March 1999 we submitted 145 questionnaires to all Swiss hospitals providing an obstetric service., Results: The rate of epidural analgesia (EA) was higher in large hospitals (> 1,000 births/year) than in small services. EA was maintained by continuous infusion techniques in 53% of the responding hospitals. For elective caesarean section, spinal anaesthesia (SA) and EA were performed in 77% and 16% of the patients, respectively. General anaesthesia (5%) was only used in small hospitals (< 500 births/year). Emergency caesarean section was performed under SA in 75% of all hospitals and only in 25% was a general anaesthesia used. An already existing EA for labour analgesia was continued for anaesthesia for caesarean section in 63% of Swiss hospitals., Conclusions: Regional anaesthesia was most commonly used for obstetric anaesthesia in Swiss hospitals. Epidemiological studies, recommendations of the Swiss interest group for obstetric anaesthesia, as well as the expectations of pregnant women, increased the numbers of regional anaesthesia compared with the first survey in 1992.

We report the successful anaesthetic management of therapeutic abortion under spinal anaesthesia in a 32-yr-old woman with Takayasu's disease. The pathology and pathophysiology of this syndrome and their impact on anaesthesia are discussed.