Search

Background and objectives: Limited data are present on safety and efficiency of epinephrine for the prophylaxis and treatment of spinal-hypotension. This was conducted to compare the effect of epinephrine with norepinephrine and phenylephrine on the treatment of spinal-hypotension and ephedrine requirement during cesarean delivery. Methods: 160 parturient with uncomplicated pregnancies undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were recruited. They were allocated randomly to receive norepinephrine 5 μg.mL-1 (n = 40), epinephrine 5 μg.mL-1 (n = 40), phenylephrine 100 μg.mL-1 (n = 40) or 0.9% saline infusions (n = 40) immediately after induction of spinal anesthesia. Whenever systolic blood pressure drops to less than 80% of baseline, 5 mg of IV ephedrine was administered as rescue vasopressor. The incidence of hypotension, total number of hypotension episodes, the number of patients requiring ephedrine, the mean amount of ephedrine consumption and side effects were recorded. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in incidence of maternal hypotension between groups. The number of patients requiring ephedrine was significantly greater in group saline than in group phenylephrine (p Conclusion: There is no statistically significant difference in incidence of hypotension and ephedrine consumption during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery with the use of epinephrine when compared to norepinephrine or phenylephrine. Epinephrine can be considered as an alternative agent for management of spinal hypotension.

PubMedID: 28647444 Objective The predictive value of spot urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (PCR) for estimating total 24-hour proteinuria in severe preeclampsia is unclear. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of spot urine PCR for ascertaining the magnitude of proteinuria in women with preeclampsia of varying severity. Methods A total of 205 patients with prediagnosed preeclampsia were included in this prospective cohort study. Patients were allocated into one of the three groups categorized by severity of disease, as follows: gestational hypertension, group 1 (n = 41); preeclampsia, group 2 (n = 88); and severe preeclampsia, group 3 (n = 76). We assessed the spot urine PCRs to determine significant proteinuria and the magnitude of proteinuria in these groups. Results The spot urine PCR was 0.53, with 81% sensitivity and 93% specificity to detect significant proteinuria. A significant correlation was found between PCR and 24-hour total proteinuria in group 1 (r = 0.473, P = 0.002). There were also significant correlations in group 2 (r = 0.814, P < 0.001) and group 3 (r = 0.912, P < 0.001). The established formula using spot urine PCR to estimate 24-hour total proteinuria in severe preeclampsia was Y = 832.02X + 378.74 mg (r 2 = 0.8304). Conclusion Although 24-hour urine collection remains a merely reliable test to determine the degree of total proteinuria, our findings suggest that it is likely to assess the magnitude of proteinuria by the spot urine PCR, especially in severe preeclampsia. Clinical trial registration www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01623791 © 2017 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada