Key result
Prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion significantly reduced the number of hypotension episodes and required norepinephrine boluses compared to therapeutic boluses (p<0.001).
Why the study?
Norepinephrine is used for spinal anesthesia-related hypotension, but few studies have compared norepinephrine infusion versus bolus administration in parturients with preeclampsia.
Does prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion improve hemodynamic stability compared to therapeutic norepinephrine bolus in pregnant females with preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia?
RCT (n=100)
Does prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion improve hemodynamic stability compared to therapeutic norepinephrine bolus in pregnant females with preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia?
p-value: p=< 0.001
Prophylactic norepinephrine infusion provides better hemodynamic stability than therapeutic boluses for preeclamptic women undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, without adverse neonatal effects.
Infusion may reduce hypotension episodes versus bolus in preeclamptic cesarean deliveries; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
Background: Currently, spinal anesthesia for cesarean section is the anesthetic technique of choice for women with preeclampsia in the absence of contraindications to neuraxial anesthesia. Recently, norepinephrine has been introduced for prevention and treatment of hypotension associated with spinal anesthesia; however, only a couple of studies have compared norepinephrine infusion and bolus. Aims: This study aims to compare primarily the efficacy and safety of norepinephrine bolus given therapeutically and norepinephrine infusion given prophylactically for management of hypotension and effects on other hemodynamic parameters in parturients with preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia and secondarily to determine the effects of study drugs on neonatal Apgar score and arterial blood gas analysis of neonatal blood. Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 100 singleton full-term pregnant females of ASA grade II, aged 18–35 years, diagnosed with preeclampsia (controlled on single antihypertensive drug with BP ≤140/90), scheduled for elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups. Group A: Received therapeutic norepinephrine bolus (4 mg) only when hypotension (fall in SBP to ≤20% of baseline) was detected after spinal anesthesia. Group B: Received prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion (4 mg/min) immediately after induction of spinal anesthesia. Results: Heart rate, systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure had statistically significant difference at 3,4,5,6,7,8,9, and 10 mins of surgery. Number of episodes of hypotension and number of norepinephrine boluses used in Group A were higher and statistically significant (p-value < 0.001) than Group B. Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes as well as umbilical artery parameters in two groups was comparable and statistically insignificant (p-value 0.301 for Apgar at 1 min and P value 0.562 for Apgar at 5 mins). Conclusion: Although both norepinephrine bolus and infusion doses are an effective way to treat spinal anesthesia-related hypotension in patients with preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section with comparable maternal and fetal side effects, infusion dose of norepinephrine is better in maintaining hemodynamics of parturients with insignificant changes in neonatal outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wakhloo et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia (n=100). Prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion vs. Therapeutic norepinephrine bolus (4 mg) was evaluated on Number of episodes of hypotension and number of norepinephrine boluses used (p=< 0.001). Prophylactic intravenous norepinephrine infusion significantly reduced the number of hypotension episodes and required norepinephrine boluses compared to therapeutic boluses (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: