Search

Study Objective: The primary aim of the proposed study was to determine the association between postoperative pain and breastfeeding after cesarean delivery during hospital stay., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Postoperative recovery area and operating room., Patients: Data was obtained on singleton pregnancies undergoing scheduled cesarean deliveries under spinal anesthesia between 2013 and 2016., Interventions: Determine the association between postoperative pain and breastfeeding after cesarean delivery., Measurements: Postoperative pain score, breastfeeding, LATCH score post-partum depression and length of stay values collected., Main Results: The dataset consisted of electronic medical records from 5350 patients. We found that the pain score is negatively associated with the LATCH score; higher pain was associated with lower LATCH scores, -0.01 [-0.01,-0.00], p < .0402. Every one-point increase in average pain score was associated with a 21% reduction in the odds of in-hospital exclusive breast-feeding relative to exclusive formula-feeding, OR = 0.79 [0.70-0.90], p < .0002. We observed that the post-partum depression status was associated with the average postoperative pain score, F (1, 5347) = 41.51, p < .0001. We also found a significant positive association between the average pain score and the duration of hospital stay (p < .0001); every one-point increase in the average pain-score was associated with a 7.98 [6.28, 9.68] hour increase in length of stay., Conclusions: Our results demonstrate significant association between the increase in post-cesarean pain scores and deterioration of breastfeeding initiation while also exposing slight reductions in the quality of breastfeeding. Additionally, we found that increases in post-cesarean pain scores also positively associate with postpartum depression and duration of stay, with each increase in pain score resulted in an almost one-day increase in the length of stay., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Authors have no conflict of interest., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Women have blamed epidurals for their post-partum back pain for decades. Survey-based studies have shown similar incidence of chronic back pain between women who delivered with epidurals compared to those who did not. However, epidural insertion site pain has yet to be evaluated by a quantitative measure: pressure pain threshold (PPT). Algometer measured PPT has been shown to be accurate and reproducible in acute, chronic, and postoperative pain studies. This study determines the effect of ultrasound-based landmarks on the PPT at the epidural insertion site in the post-partum period., Methods: Participants were randomized into either the ultrasound or sham groups. In addition, a non-randomized control group (no epidural) participated. Ultrasound of the lumbar region was used to mark mid intervertebral levels in the US group but not in the sham group. Epidural were placed using the marks in the US group or palpated bony landmarks in the sham group. PPT at each intervertebral space measured before and after the use of epidural., Results: Epidural placement did significantly decreased PPT in US (68%) and US sham (79%) groups and less in the control group (21%). US group showed decreased PPT only at insertion site whereas US sham group also showed decreased PPT at insertion site and adjacent levels., Conclusions: We showed that epidural placed with ultrasound-determined landmarks not only improves the success of epidural placement but also minimizes the number of intervertebral levels with decreased PPT.

Amniotic fluid embolism is a leading cause of maternal mortality in developed countries. Our understanding of risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis is hampered by a lack of uniform clinical case definition; neither histologic nor laboratory findings have been identified unique to this condition. Amniotic fluid embolism is often overdiagnosed in critically ill peripartum women, particularly when an element of coagulopathy is involved. Previously proposed case definitions for amniotic fluid embolism are nonspecific, and when viewed through the eyes of individuals with experience in critical care obstetrics, would include women with a number of medical conditions much more common than amniotic fluid embolism. We convened a working group under the auspices of a committee of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the Amniotic Fluid Embolism Foundation whose task was to develop uniform diagnostic criteria for the research reporting of amniotic fluid embolism. These criteria rely on the presence of the classic triad of hemodynamic and respiratory compromise accompanied by strictly defined disseminated intravascular coagulopathy. It is anticipated that limiting research reports involving amniotic fluid embolism to women who meet these criteria will enhance the validity of published data and assist in the identification of risk factors, effective treatments, and possibly useful biomarkers for this condition. A registry has been established in conjunction with the Perinatal Research Branch of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to collect both clinical information and laboratory specimens of women with suspected amniotic fluid embolism in the hopes of identifying unique biomarkers of this condition., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine if passive leg raising (PLR) significantly increases cardiac output in a cohort of healthy pregnant women during the third trimester., Study Design: Using a noninvasive monitor, baseline hemodynamic measurements for arterial blood pressure, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, cardiac output, cardiac index, stroke volume, and systemic vascular resistances were obtained with patients in the semirecumbent position. Measurements were repeated after a 3-minute PLR maneuver in supine, right lateral decubitus, and left lateral decubitus positions., Results: After 10 minutes of bed rest, the cohort's mean baseline heart rate was 80 ± 12 beats/minute. Baseline stroke volume was 98 ± 14 mL, mean cardiac output was 7.8 ± 1.2 L/min, and mean cardiac index was 4.32 ± 0.63 L/min. The baseline systemic vascular resistance value was 893 ± 160 dynes/sec/cm(5). Baseline mean arterial blood pressure was 84 ± 11 mm Hg. Following a PLR maneuver in the supine position, heart rate decreased significantly. No difference was noted in other measurements. Findings were similar with PLR in the left lateral decubitus. PLR in the right lateral decubitus resulted in significantly decreased heart rate, cardiac output, and cardiac index., Conclusions: PLR did not result in cardiac output recruitment in a cohort of healthy pregnant women during the third trimester., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy complicate 7% to 10% of pregnancies and are among the major causes of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Recently American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Taskforce on Hypertension during Pregnancy modified the diagnosis and management of hypertension in pregnancy, recommending prompt diagnosis, admission, close monitoring, and treatment. They strive to decrease maternal mortality and systemic complications. Labetalol, hydralazine, or nifedipine are considered first-line treatment, and either can be used to stabilize the patient with similar outcomes. Definite treatment is delivery of the fetus and should be considered based on the etiology of the hypertensive crisis and gestational age.

The occurrence of broken spinal and epidural needles has been reported. However, most case reports have focused primarily on prevention rather than on management. A broken spinal needle fragment was left in a patient before it was removed one month later due to back pain., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy constitute one of the most frequent medical complications during gestation. Unfortunately, maternal and perinatal mortality remains significant worldwide in this population. Not infrequently, patients with severe preeclampsia will need parenteral agents to achieve rapid blood pressure control to avoid end-organ damage. During the last decades, new antihypertensive medications have become available for management of hypertensive crisis. One of these agents is the calcium channel blocker nicardipine. Nicardipine has been used extensively in different clinical settings including neurosurgery, cardiothoracic surgery, transplant medicine, and internal medicine patients. Minimal data exist in the literature regarding the use of this medicine during pregnancy. The purpose of this article is to review the pharmacological properties of nicardipine, the available literature regarding its use during pregnancy, and potential interactions with other medicines used commonly in preeclampsia, as well as potential side effects directly affecting the peripartum period.

Pulmonary embolism is the primary cause of acute respiratory decompensation during pregnancy. Regardless of the nature of the embolism, a high index of suspicion, early diagnosis, and aggressive resuscitation need to be instituted to achieve a successful maternal and fetal outcome. Several clinical characteristics will assist practitioners to distinguish among the different forms of embolism and to institute specific measures of treatment.

Epidural blockade is an important option for anesthesia in parturients undergoing abdominal delivery. Despite the multiple benefits of this method, there is at least one significant downside--a relatively high occurrence of unsatisfactory anesthesia that requires intervention. Depending on the presumed mechanism of epidural block failure and other clinically relevant factors (e.g., timing of diagnosis, urgency of the procedure, and so forth), certain effective measures are recommended to successfully manage this demanding situation. In general, it is important to make every effort to make the pre-existing epidural effective or replace it with another regional technique, because overall, regional anesthesia is associated with significantly lower maternal mortality. It is important to identify a dysfunctional epidural block preoperatively before a maximum volume of local anesthetic has been administered. If catheter manipulation does not produce substantial improvement, and there is no time constraint, it is safe and reasonable to replace the epidural catheter. However, risks associated with excessive volume of local anesthetic should be kept in mind. Additional epidural injections or a second catheter placement might be considered under special circumstances. Single-shot spinal anesthesia after a failed epidural may provide fast onset and reliable surgical anesthesia. Available data, although limited and contradictory, suggest the possibility of unpredictably high or total spinal anesthesia. Many authors, however, believe that appropriate precautions and modifications in technique make this a safe alternative. These modifications include limiting the amount of epidural local anesthetic administered when diagnosing a nonfunctioning epidural and decreasing the dose of intrathecal local anesthetic by 20% to 30%. If there is no documented block when the spinal is inserted, and more than 30 minutes have passed from the last epidural dose, it is probably safe to use a normal dose of local anesthetic. Continuous spinal anesthesia with a macro catheter might be a dependable alternative, particularly if large amounts of local anesthetic have already been used or the patient's airway is a cause for concern. Although there are no reports of combined spinal epidural anesthesia being used in this context, it would appear to be an attractive alternative. It allows the anesthesiologist to give smaller doses intrathecally, while still offering the flexibility of augmenting the block if needed. When inadequate epidural block becomes apparent during surgery there are limited alternatives. Depending on the origin and the pattern of inadequate anesthesia, options may include psychological support, supplementation with a variety of inhalational and intravenous agents, and local anesthetic infiltration. Induction of general anesthesia is typically left as a backup option, but must be strongly considered if the patient continues to have pain/discomfort.