Anesthesia characteristic of an algorithm of bupivacaine dose based on height in caesarean section under spinal anesthesia: a retrospective cohort study.
Anesthesia characteristic
Anesthesia, spinal
Bupivacaine
Cesarean section
Height
Journal
BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 05 2023
02 05 2023
Historique:
received:
15
01
2023
accepted:
26
04
2023
medline:
4
5
2023
pubmed:
3
5
2023
entrez:
2
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
An algorithm of bupivacaine dose based on height is applied to reduce maternal hypotension in caesarean section under spinal anesthesia. This study is designed to further verify whether the algorithm of bupivacaine dose based on height is suitable. The parturients were grouped according to height. The comparison of anesthesia characteristic among subgroups was carried out. The univariate and multivariate binary logistic regressions were executed to reanalyze the interference factor for the anesthesia characteristic. When the dose of bupivacaine was adjusted by using the height based dosing algorithm, except for weight (P < 0.05), other general data did not present statistical changes with height (P > 0.05); the incidences of complications, characteristics of sensory or motor block, quality of anesthesia and neonatal outcome were of no statistical difference among parturients with different heights (P > 0.05); the height, weight and body mass index were not related with maternal hypotension (P > 0.05). When the dose of bupivacaine is constant, except for weight and body mass index (P > 0.05), the height was the independent risk factor for maternal hypotension (P < 0.05). Except for weight and body mass index, the height has an influence on the bupivacaine dose. It is reasonable that the bupivacaine dose is adjusted by using this dosing algorithm based on height. This study was registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (13/04/2018, NCT03497364).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
An algorithm of bupivacaine dose based on height is applied to reduce maternal hypotension in caesarean section under spinal anesthesia. This study is designed to further verify whether the algorithm of bupivacaine dose based on height is suitable.
METHODS
The parturients were grouped according to height. The comparison of anesthesia characteristic among subgroups was carried out. The univariate and multivariate binary logistic regressions were executed to reanalyze the interference factor for the anesthesia characteristic.
RESULTS
When the dose of bupivacaine was adjusted by using the height based dosing algorithm, except for weight (P < 0.05), other general data did not present statistical changes with height (P > 0.05); the incidences of complications, characteristics of sensory or motor block, quality of anesthesia and neonatal outcome were of no statistical difference among parturients with different heights (P > 0.05); the height, weight and body mass index were not related with maternal hypotension (P > 0.05). When the dose of bupivacaine is constant, except for weight and body mass index (P > 0.05), the height was the independent risk factor for maternal hypotension (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Except for weight and body mass index, the height has an influence on the bupivacaine dose. It is reasonable that the bupivacaine dose is adjusted by using this dosing algorithm based on height.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study was registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (13/04/2018, NCT03497364).
Identifiants
pubmed: 37131191
doi: 10.1186/s12871-023-02113-0
pii: 10.1186/s12871-023-02113-0
pmc: PMC10152727
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bupivacaine
Y8335394RO
Anesthetics, Local
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03497364']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
146Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010 Sep;54(8):909-21
pubmed: 20455872
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Aug;122(2 Pt 1):262-267
pubmed: 23969793
Anaesthesia. 1982 Jun;37(6):658-62
pubmed: 7091625
J Anesth. 2011 Apr;25(2):213-8
pubmed: 21193999
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1997 Aug;41(7):884-7
pubmed: 9265932
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004 May-Jun;29(3):221-6
pubmed: 15138906
Anesth Analg. 2016 Dec;123(6):1527-1534
pubmed: 27870737
Anesth Analg. 1987 Feb;66(2):127-31
pubmed: 3813056
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2006 Oct;15(4):273-8
pubmed: 16774830
Cell Biochem Biophys. 2015 Dec;73(3):687-93
pubmed: 27259311
BMJ Open. 2019 May 16;9(5):e024912
pubmed: 31101694
Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2011 Jan-Feb;61(1):21-30
pubmed: 21334504
Anesthesiology. 1990 Mar;72(3):478-82
pubmed: 2310028
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2016 Apr;69(2):143-8
pubmed: 27066205
Anesth Analg. 1985 Jul;64(7):715-30
pubmed: 3893222
Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Oct;23(3):273-81
pubmed: 26860016
Anesth Analg. 2011 Oct;113(4):811-7
pubmed: 21890887
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Jun 10;9:858115
pubmed: 35755061
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Feb;170(2):560-5
pubmed: 8116713
Anesthesiology. 2008 Nov;109(5):856-63
pubmed: 18946298
Br J Anaesth. 2003 May;90(5):659-64
pubmed: 12697595
Niger J Clin Pract. 2013 Apr-Jun;16(2):195-200
pubmed: 23563461
Adv Nutr. 2012 Mar 01;3(2):250-4
pubmed: 22516736
PLoS One. 2015 May 13;10(5):e0125014
pubmed: 25970485
BMJ. 2018 Mar 29;360:k1274
pubmed: 29599212
Curr Med Res Opin. 2022 Aug;38(8):1467-1472
pubmed: 35686858
Anesthesiology. 2017 Aug;127(2):241-249
pubmed: 28598894
Reg Anesth. 1990 Jan-Feb;15(1):6-11
pubmed: 2275917
Anesth Analg. 1996 Dec;83(6):1229-33
pubmed: 8942591