open access

Vol 92, No 7 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2021-04-06
Get Citation

The effect of various pressure of pneumatic uterine bracket by using saccule sterine external stent on incidence of supine hypotensive syndrome

Tianke Xiao1, Wei Li2, Mingshuai Yu1, Xuehui Wu2, Ke Zhang1, Jingyi Wang2
DOI: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0009
·
Pubmed: 33844258
·
Ginekol Pol 2021;92(7):505-511.
Affiliations
  1. Department of Anesthesiology, CNNC 416th Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, China
  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CNNC 416th Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, China

open access

Vol 92, No 7 (2021)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Obstetrics
Published online: 2021-04-06

Abstract

Objectives: The saccule uterine external stent with a pneumatic uterine bracket reportedly prevents the incidence of supine hypotension syndrome (SHS) during cesarean section under combined spinal — epidural anesthesia (CSEA). However, the preventive effect is affected by the pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket. This study aims to explore the optimal pressure.
Material and methods: One hundred forty-eight pregnant women were selected and randomly divided into three groups: Group A (the control group, n = 49), Group B (n = 49), and Group C (n = 50). The pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket was set at 240 mmHg, 260mmHg, and 280mmHg, respectively, during cesarean section under CSEA for participants in groups A, B and C. The intraoperative comfort rate and incidence of SHS were recorded.
Results: No significant difference in the anesthetic efficacy was observed among the three groups (p > 0.05). However, there was a significant difference in the occurrence of SHS, with a reduction of 30 mmHg in blood pressure. The incidence of SHS belong the three groups showed significant differences (36.73% in Group A, 18.37% in Group B and 18.00% in Group C, p < 0.05). In addition, significant differences (p < 0.05) in the intraoperative comfort rate were also found among the three groups, with the comfort rate of 69.39% in group A, 91.84% in group B and 90.00% in Group C.
Conclusions: The optimal pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket for preventing SHS hypotension is about 260 mmHg. These findings might contribute to the prevention of SHS.

Abstract

Objectives: The saccule uterine external stent with a pneumatic uterine bracket reportedly prevents the incidence of supine hypotension syndrome (SHS) during cesarean section under combined spinal — epidural anesthesia (CSEA). However, the preventive effect is affected by the pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket. This study aims to explore the optimal pressure.
Material and methods: One hundred forty-eight pregnant women were selected and randomly divided into three groups: Group A (the control group, n = 49), Group B (n = 49), and Group C (n = 50). The pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket was set at 240 mmHg, 260mmHg, and 280mmHg, respectively, during cesarean section under CSEA for participants in groups A, B and C. The intraoperative comfort rate and incidence of SHS were recorded.
Results: No significant difference in the anesthetic efficacy was observed among the three groups (p > 0.05). However, there was a significant difference in the occurrence of SHS, with a reduction of 30 mmHg in blood pressure. The incidence of SHS belong the three groups showed significant differences (36.73% in Group A, 18.37% in Group B and 18.00% in Group C, p < 0.05). In addition, significant differences (p < 0.05) in the intraoperative comfort rate were also found among the three groups, with the comfort rate of 69.39% in group A, 91.84% in group B and 90.00% in Group C.
Conclusions: The optimal pressure within pneumatic uterine bracket for preventing SHS hypotension is about 260 mmHg. These findings might contribute to the prevention of SHS.

Get Citation

Keywords

pneumatic uterine bracket; gasbag pressure; cesarean section; supine hypotension syndrome

About this article
Title

The effect of various pressure of pneumatic uterine bracket by using saccule sterine external stent on incidence of supine hypotensive syndrome

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Vol 92, No 7 (2021)

Article type

Research paper

Pages

505-511

Published online

2021-04-06

DOI

10.5603/GP.a2021.0009

Pubmed

33844258

Bibliographic record

Ginekol Pol 2021;92(7):505-511.

Keywords

pneumatic uterine bracket
gasbag pressure
cesarean section
supine hypotension syndrome

Authors

Tianke Xiao
Wei Li
Mingshuai Yu
Xuehui Wu
Ke Zhang
Jingyi Wang

References (18)
  1. Laudenbach V, Mercier FJ, Rozé JC, et al. Epipage Study Group. Anaesthesia mode for caesarean section and mortality in very preterm infants: an epidemiologic study in the EPIPAGE cohort. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2009; 18(2): 142–149.
  2. Klöhr S, Roth R, Hofmann T, et al. Definitions of hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: literature search and application to parturients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010; 54(8): 909–921.
  3. Stamer UM, Wulf H. Complications of obstetric anaesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2001; 14(3): 317–322.
  4. Maronge L, Bogod D. Complications in obstetric anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2018; 73 Suppl 1: 61–66.
  5. Saravanan S, Kocarev M, Wilson RC, et al. Equivalent dose of ephedrine and phenylephrine in the prevention of post-spinal hypotension in Caesarean section. Br J Anaesth. 2006; 96(1): 95–99.
  6. King HK, Wood L, Steffens Z, et al. Spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: isobaric versus hyperbaric solution. Acta Anaesthesiol Sin. 1999; 37(2): 61–64.
  7. Friedberg V, Martin K, Gerteis R. [Changes of vein pressure and renal function by different positions of pregnant women. (A contribution to the supine hypotensive syndrome) (author's transl)]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1974; 34(10): 809–817.
  8. Lemtis H, Seger R. [Supine hypotensive syndrome and obstetric anaesthesia (author's transl)]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1974; 34(9): 788–790.
  9. Morgan PJ, Halpern SH, Tarshis J. The effects of an increase of central blood volume before spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a qualitative systematic review. Anesth Analg. 2001; 92(4): 997–1005.
  10. Dahlgren G, Granath F, Wessel H, et al. Prediction of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for Cesarean section and its relation to the effect of crystalloid or colloid preload. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2007; 16(2): 128–134.
  11. Riley ET. Editorial I: Spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery: keep the pressure up and don't spare the vasoconstrictors. Br J Anaesth. 2004; 92(4): 459–461.
  12. Cooper DW, Carpenter M, Mowbray P, et al. Fetal and maternal effects of phenylephrine and ephedrine during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology. 2002; 97(6): 1582–1590.
  13. Lee A, Ngan Kee WD, Gin T. A dose-response meta-analysis of prophylactic intravenous ephedrine for the prevention of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg. 2004; 98(2): 483–90, table of contents.
  14. Erkinaro T, Mäkikallio K, Acharya G, et al. Divergent effects of ephedrine and phenylephrine on cardiovascular hemodynamics of near-term fetal sheep exposed to hypoxemia and maternal hypotension. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007; 51(7): 922–928.
  15. Berlac PA, Rasmussen YH. Per-operative cerebral near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) predicts maternal hypotension during elective caesarean delivery in spinal anaesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2005; 14(1): 26–31.
  16. Zhou ZQ, Shao Q, Zeng Q, et al. Lumbar wedge versus pelvic wedge in preventing hypotension following combined spinal epidural anaesthesia for caesarean delivery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2008; 36(6): 835–839.
  17. Kundra P, Khanna S, Habeebullah S, et al. Manual displacement of the uterus during Caesarean section. Anaesthesia. 2007; 62(5): 460–465.
  18. Xiao TK, Li W, Zhang K, et al. Clinical of air pressure uterus bracket in preventing supine hypotensive syndrome during C-section under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. 2017; 10(9): 13598–13606.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl