Anaesthesia for Caesarean section and neonatal acid-base status: a meta-analysis
- PMID: 15960713
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04223.x
Anaesthesia for Caesarean section and neonatal acid-base status: a meta-analysis
Abstract
Spinal anaesthesia is generally preferred for Caesarean section. Its superiority for the baby is often assumed. Umbilical artery acid-base status provides a valid index of fetal welfare. Twenty-seven studies reporting neonatal acid-base data with different types of anaesthesia were used to compare umbilical artery or vein pH and base deficit, using random-effect meta-analysis. Cord pH was significantly lower with spinal than with both general (difference: -0.015; 95% CI -0.029 to -0.001; 13 studies, 1272 subjects) and epidural anaesthesia (difference -0.013; 95% CI -0.024 to -0.002; 11 studies, 828 subjects). Larger doses of ephedrine contributed to the latter effect (p = 0.023). Sixteen studies reported a base deficit, which was significantly higher for spinal than for general (difference 1.109; 95% CI 0.434-1.784 mEq.l(-1); seven studies, 695 subject) and epidural anaesthesia (difference 0.910; 95% CI 0.222-1.598 mEq.l(-1); seven studies, 497 subjects). Spinal anaesthesia cannot be considered safer than epidural or general anaesthesia for the fetus.
Comment in
-
Spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section: time for re-appraisal?Anaesthesia. 2005 Jul;60(7):633-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04282.x. Anaesthesia. 2005. PMID: 15960712 No abstract available.
-
Spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section and fetal acidosis.Anaesthesia. 2005 Dec;60(12):1238-9; author reply 1239-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04444.x. Anaesthesia. 2005. PMID: 16288625 No abstract available.
-
What babies want.Anaesthesia. 2005 Dec;60(12):1241-2; author reply 1242. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04445.x. Anaesthesia. 2005. PMID: 16288626 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
