open access

Ahead of Print
Review paper
Published online: 2021-09-21
Get Citation

Anaesthesia of pregnant women

Zaneta Jastrzebska-Stojko1, Marcin Sadlocha2
DOI: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0062
Affiliations
  1. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Clinical Center, Medical University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland
  2. Clinic of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecological Oncology, Department of Heath Science in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Poland

open access

Ahead of Print
REVIEW PAPERS Obstetrics
Published online: 2021-09-21

Abstract

Labor pain is not only an unpleasant mental experience, but one of the most important factors that may negatively affect the course of labor and the well-being of the fetus. Over the years, many techniques for relieving labor pain have been developed, ranging from non-pharmacological (acupuncture, TENS, hypnosis...), through opioids and aeriform anesthetics, to regional analgesia techniques. Numerous studies and meta-analyzes prove that central blockades are the gold standard of labor analgesia and debunk the myths that these blockages are negatively limited to the course of labor. In the light of recent studies, the claim that epidural analgesia increases the risk of termination by caesarean section should be rejected. It has also been proven that central blockades do not lower the child's APGAR score. Feeling, an indication to use a central block during labor, should be a subjective intolerance to pain and the wishes of the mother in labor. The review presents the directions of development and the current state of knowledge of modern medicine regarding various anesthesia techniques, their safety for the mother, fetus and newborn, as well as practical tips to increase the satisfaction of the mother in labor.

Abstract

Labor pain is not only an unpleasant mental experience, but one of the most important factors that may negatively affect the course of labor and the well-being of the fetus. Over the years, many techniques for relieving labor pain have been developed, ranging from non-pharmacological (acupuncture, TENS, hypnosis...), through opioids and aeriform anesthetics, to regional analgesia techniques. Numerous studies and meta-analyzes prove that central blockades are the gold standard of labor analgesia and debunk the myths that these blockages are negatively limited to the course of labor. In the light of recent studies, the claim that epidural analgesia increases the risk of termination by caesarean section should be rejected. It has also been proven that central blockades do not lower the child's APGAR score. Feeling, an indication to use a central block during labor, should be a subjective intolerance to pain and the wishes of the mother in labor. The review presents the directions of development and the current state of knowledge of modern medicine regarding various anesthesia techniques, their safety for the mother, fetus and newborn, as well as practical tips to increase the satisfaction of the mother in labor.

Get Citation

Keywords

partus; vaginal birth; anaesthesia; epidural analgesia

About this article
Title

Anaesthesia of pregnant women

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Ahead of Print

Article type

Review paper

Published online

2021-09-21

DOI

10.5603/GP.a2021.0062

Keywords

partus
vaginal birth
anaesthesia
epidural analgesia

Authors

Zaneta Jastrzebska-Stojko
Marcin Sadlocha

References (37)
  1. Fisher SC, Siag K, Howley MM, et al. National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Maternal surgery and anesthesia during pregnancy and risk of birth defects in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997-2011. Birth Defects Res. 2020; 112(2): 162–174.
  2. Tumukunde J, Lomangisi DD, Davidson O, et al. Effects of propofol versus thiopental on Apgar scores in newborns and peri-operative outcomes of women undergoing emergency cesarean section: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015; 15: 63.
  3. Houthoff Khemlani K, Weibel S, Kranke P, et al. Hypnotic agents for induction of general anesthesia in cesarean section patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Anesth. 2018; 48: 73–80.
  4. Heesen M, Böhmer J, Brinck ECV, et al. Intravenous ketamine during spinal and general anaesthesia for caesarean section: systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2015; 59(4): 414–426.
  5. White LD, Hodsdon A, An GH, et al. Induction opioids for caesarean section under general anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019; 40: 4–13.
  6. Devroe S, Van de Velde M, Rex S. General anesthesia for caesarean section. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015; 28(3): 240–246.
  7. Xia F, Chang X, Zhang Y, et al. The effect of intrathecal dexmedetomidine on the dose requirement of hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018; 18(1): 74.
  8. Braga Ad, Braga FS, Hirata ES, et al. Association of lipophilic opioids and hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section. Randomized controlled study. Acta Cir Bras. 2014; 29(11): 752–758.
  9. Lim G, Facco FL, Nathan N, et al. A Review of the Impact of Obstetric Anesthesia on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes. Anesthesiology. 2018; 129(1): 192–215.
  10. Chau A, Bibbo C, Huang CC, et al. Dural Puncture Epidural Technique Improves Labor Analgesia Quality With Fewer Side Effects Compared With Epidural and Combined Spinal Epidural Techniques: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Anesth Analg. 2017; 124(2): 560–569.
  11. Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology. Anesthesiology. 2016; 124(2): 270–300.
  12. Lieberman E, O'Donoghue C. Unintended effects of epidural analgesia during labor: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186(5): S31–S68.
  13. Leone S, Di Cianni S, Casati A, et al. Pharmacology, toxicology, and clinical use of new long acting local anesthetics, ropivacaine and levobupivacaine. Acta Biomed. 2008; 79(2): 92–105.
  14. Sultan P, Murphy C, Halpern S, et al. The effect of low concentrations versus high concentrations of local anesthetics for labour analgesia on obstetric and anesthetic outcomes: a meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2013; 60(9): 840–854.
  15. Onuoha OC. Epidural Analgesia for Labor: Continuous Infusion Versus Programmed Intermittent Bolus. Anesthesiol Clin. 2017; 35(1): 1–14.
  16. Wong CA. In: Chestnut DH. ed. Epidural and Spinal Analgesia/Anesthesia for Labor and Vaginal Delivery, Obstetric Anesthesia: Principles and Practice. Mosby 2014: 490.
  17. Wong CA. Advances in labor analgesia. Int J Womens Health. 2010; 1: 139–154.
  18. Zakus P, Arzola C, Bittencourt R, et al. Determination of the Optimal Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus Volume of Bupivacaine 0.0625% With Fentanyl 2 μg.ml -1 at a Fixed Interval of Forty Minutes: A Biased Coin Up-And-Down Sequential Allocation Trial. Anaesthesia. 2018; 73(4): 459–465.
  19. Bittencourt R, Arzola C, Zakus P, et al. A biased coin up-and-down sequential allocation trial to determine the optimum programmed intermittent epidural bolus time interval between 5 mL boluses of bupivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 µg·mL. Can J Anaesth. 2019; 66(9): 1075–1081.
  20. Zhou SQ, Wang J, Du WJ, et al. Optimum interval time of programmed intermittent epidural bolus of ropivacaine 0.08% with sufentanyl 0.3 μg/mL for labor analgesia: a biased-coin up-and-down sequential allocation trial. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020; 133(5): 517–522.
  21. McKenzie CP, Cobb B, Riley ET, et al. Programmed intermittent epidural boluses for maintenance of labor analgesia: an impact study. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2016; 26: 32–38.
  22. Bullingham A, Liang S, Edmonds E, et al. Continuous epidural infusion vs programmed intermittent epidural bolus for labour analgesia: a prospective, controlled, before-and-after cohort study of labour outcomes. Br J Anaesth. 2018; 121(2): 432–437.
  23. Moore JM. Continuous spinal anesthesia. Am J Ther. 2009; 16(4): 289–294.
  24. Tao W, Grant EN, Craig MG, et al. Continuous Spinal Analgesia for Labor and Delivery: An Observational Study with a 23-Gauge Spinal Catheter. Anesth Analg. 2015; 121(5): 1290–1294.
  25. Veličković I, Pujic B, Baysinger CW, et al. Continuous Spinal Anesthesia for Obstetric Anesthesia and Analgesia. Front Med (Lausanne). 2017; 4: 133.
  26. Beh ZY, Au Yong PS, Lye S, et al. Continuous spinal anaesthesia: A retrospective analysis of 318 cases. Indian J Anaesth. 2018; 62(10): 765–772.
  27. Weibel S, Jelting Y, Afshari A, et al. Patient-controlled analgesia with remifentanil versus alternative parenteral methods for pain management in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 4: CD011989.
  28. Van de Velde M, Carvalho B. Remifentanil for labor analgesia: an evidence-based narrative review. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2016; 25: 66–74.
  29. Thorbiörnson A, da Silva Charvalho P, Gupta A, et al. Duration of labor, delivery mode and maternal and neonatal morbidity after remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia compared with epidural analgesia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2020; 6: 100106.
  30. Nitrous oxide. 2018 Drugs and Lactation Database (LactMed) [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US) 2006.
  31. Attar AS, Feizabadi AS, Jarahi L, et al. Effect of Entonox on reducing the need for Pethidine and the Relevant Fetal and Maternal Complications for Painless Labor. Electron Physician. 2016; 8(12): 3325–3332.
  32. Buhre W, Disma N, Hendrickx J, et al. European Society of Anaesthesiology Task Force on Nitrous Oxide: a narrative review of its role in clinical practice. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 122(5): 587–604.
  33. Choi DH, Kim JA, Chung IS. Comparison of combined spinal epidural anesthesia and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000; 44(2): 214–219.
  34. Wei Y, Yun X, Yu Y, et al. Continuous intravenous infusion of remifentanil improves the experience of parturient undergoing repeated cesarean section under epidural anesthesia, a prospective, randomized study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019; 19: 243. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019; 19: 243.
  35. Arzola C, Wieczorek PM. Efficacy of low-dose bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2011; 107(3): 308–318.
  36. 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.
  37. Xu S, Mao M, Zhang S, et al. A randomized double-blind study comparing prophylactic norepinephrine and ephedrine infusion for preventing maternal spinal hypotension during elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia: A CONSORT-compliant article. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019; 98(51): e18311.

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