Background: Anesthesia is needed to ensure both maternal and fetal safety during cesarean sections. This retrospective cohort study compared maternal and fetal outcomes between general and spinal anesthesia for cesarean section based on perioperative hemodynamic parameters (pre- and postoperative systolic blood pressure, heart rate), mean difference of hematocrit and estimated blood loss, and neonatal Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min.Methods: Data from electronic medical records of 331 singleton pregnancies between January 2016 and December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively; 44 cases were excluded, and 287 cases were assigned to the general group (n = 141) or spinal group (n = 146).Results: Postoperative hemodynamic parameters were significantly higher in the general group than the spinal group (systolic blood pressure: 136.8 ± 16.7 vs. 119.3 ± 12.7 mmHg, heart rate: 93.2 ± 16.8 vs. 71.0 ± 12.7 beats/min, respectively, P < 0.001). The mean difference between the pre- and postoperative hematocrit was also significantly greater in the general than spinal group (4.8 ± 3.4% vs. 2.3 ± 3.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the spinal than general group (819.9 ± 81.9 vs. 856.7 ± 117.9 ml, P < 0.001). There was a significantly larger proportion of newborns with 5-min Apgar scores < 7 in the general than spinal group (6/141 [4.3%] vs. 0/146 [0%], respectively, P = 0.012). Conclusions: General group is associated with more maternal blood loss and a larger proportion of newborns with 5-min Apgar scores < 7 than spinal group during cesarean sections.

Background: Catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) is common in patients with a urinary catheter and is a risk factor for emergence agitation (EA). The mainstay of CRBD management is anticholinergics. Dexamethasone inhibits acetylcholine release. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of dexamethasone on postoperative CRBD and EA.Methods: In this prospective study, 90 patients undergoing urological surgery requiring urinary catheterization were allocated randomly to one of two groups (each n = 45). Before induction of anesthesia, the dexamethasone group received 10 mg (2 ml) of dexamethasone intravenously, while the control group received 2 ml of saline in the same manner. The incidence and severity of CRBD were assessed 0, 1, 2, and 6 h after the patient arrived in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) as the primary outcomes. The incidence and severity of EA were also compared during emergence and recovery from anesthesia as secondary outcomes.Results: The incidences of CRBD in the control group and dexamethasone group at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h postoperatively were 28.9% and 15.6%, 55.6% and 55.6%, 57.8% and 46.7%, and 53.3% and 51.1%, respectively. The incidence and severity of CRBD assessed at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h postoperatively did not show intergroup differences. The incidence and severity of EA in the operating room and PACU also showed no difference between the groups.Conclusions: Dexamethasone (10 mg) administered before induction of anesthesia did not further reduce the incidence or severity of CRBD or EA in patients undergoing urological surgery.

Yoon HJ, et al. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2002 May;42(5):627-633. http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2002.42.5.627

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of using phenylephrine or norepinephrine on the pH and base excess (BE) of the umbilical artery and vein in parturients undergoing cesarean section. Methods: The study protocol was registered in INPLASY. Independent researchers searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome of this study was the umbilical artery (UA) or umbilical vein (UV) pH as neonatal condition at birth, and the secondary outcome was the UA or UV BE as an additional prognostic value over the measurement of umbilical pH. Results: There was no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for overall, UA, and UV pH (mean difference (MD) −0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.004 to 0.007; MD 0.000, 95%CI −0.004 to 0.004; and MD 0.002, 95%CI −0.013 to 0.017). There was also no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for overall, UA, and UV BE (MD 0.096, 95% CI −0.258 to 0.451; MD 0.076, 95%CI −0.141 to 0.294; and MD 0.121, 95%CI; −0.569 to 0.811). A meta-regression showed that factors such as umbilical artery or vein, infusion method, single or twin, and the number of parturients per study had no effect on the UA pH, UV pH, UA BE, or UV BE. No evidence of publication bias was detected. Conclusions: There was no evidence of a difference between phenylephrine and norepinephrine for umbilical pH and BE. A subgroup analysis and meta-regression also did not show evidence of differences.

Background: Remifentanil and sufentanil are potent short-acting synthetic opioid analgesics. The administration of remifentanil has been associated with the incidence of opioid-induced hyperalgesia. Opioid-induced hyperalgesia may be alleviated when opioids, such as morphine, are switched to sufentanil. Therefore, this retrospective observational study aimed to compare the effects of remifentanil and sufentanil on postoperative pain in patients undergoing robotic gynecological surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent elective robotic gynecological surgery between January 2016 and February 2021. The patients were classified into sufentanil (n = 159) or remifentanil (n = 359) groups according to the opioids administered continuously during anesthesia. The primary outcome assessed in this study was the postoperative pain score measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS). The secondary outcomes assessed included the recovery time (from discontinuation of opioid infusion to extubation) and frequency of rescue analgesic administration in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Results: The recovery time did not differ significantly between the two groups. The NRS score for pain (median [1Q, 3Q]) in the PACU was significantly lower in the sufentanil group than in the remifentanil group (2 [2, 3] vs. 4 [3, 7], P < 0.001). The frequency of rescue analgesic administration in the PACU was 6.3% and 35.4% in the sufentanil and remifentanil groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Sufentanil, as an adjunct to sevoflurane anesthesia is more advantageous than remifentanil in terms of postoperative pain control during robotic gynecological surgery.

Hong JY, et al. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2007 Sep;53(3):S41-S46. http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2007.53.3.S41