ORIGINAL ARTICLEHetastarch co-loading is as effective as pre-loading for the prevention of hypotension following spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery
Introduction
Spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery is associated with a high incidence of hypotension,1, 2 which can result in both maternal and neonatal morbidity.3, 4 Pre-loading with crystalloid became a common clinical practice after Marx et al.3 first reported that hypotension could be prevented with a crystalloid pre-load. However, more recent studies found that traditional pre-loading techniques before spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery were relatively ineffective, and their role in the prevention of hypotension has been questioned.5, 6, 7, 8
Pharmacokinetic studies have predicted that fluid loading with crystalloid should be more efficacious if delayed until induction of spinal anesthesia, and then rapidly administered immediately thereafter.9, 10 Kamenik et al.9 found that the decrease in cardiac output after spinal anesthesia could be prevented by a rapid infusion immediately after performance of the block. This “co-loading” or “post-loading” technique may be more effective as it maximizes the intravascular volume expansion during the period of vasodilatation from sympathetic blockade and limits fluid redistribution. The efficacy of co-loading with crystalloid has been demonstrated following spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.11, 12 The authors found significantly reduced vasopressor requirements with rapid crystalloid infusion given after, rather than in the 20 min before, the induction of spinal anesthesia.
Colloidal pre-loading has been shown to be more effective than crystalloid in reducing the incidence and severity of hypotension.1, 2, 13, 14 The aim of our study was to compare a pre-loading with a co-loading technique using a colloidal solution, 6% hetastarch. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that rapid administration of hetastarch starting at the time of induction of spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery is associated with equivalent or reduced therapeutic vasopressor requirement and hypotension than the administration of an equivalent volume administered as a pre-load.
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
After receiving Stanford University Institutional Review Board approval and written informed consent, we enrolled 46 parturients scheduled for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. Inclusion criteria included: age ⩾18–45 years, weight ⩽100 kg, height ⩾150 cm, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2, and uncomplicated term singleton pregnancy. Parturients with pregnancy-induced hypertension, cardiac disease, diabetes or fetal complications, and those in labor were
Results
All the 46 subjects enrolled (23 each in the pre-load and co-load groups) completed the study. There were no drop-outs or missing data, and no unstable hypotension or bradycardia that required treatment beyond the vasopressor mixture outlined in the methods.
Patient demographics, obstetric, anesthetic and surgical variables are outlined in Table 1. There were no significant differences in vasopressor requirements between the pre-loading and the co-loading group (3.5 ± 2 mL and 3.2 ± 3 mL,
Discussion
Hetastarch co-loading compared to pre-loading appears to offer no additional advantage in the prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery with regard to pressor use, hemodynamic stability or neonatal outcome. Our findings are consistent with a recently published study by Nishikawa et al. that examined the role of hetastarch co-loading following spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.15 The authors used the same hetastarch solution as our current study and
Conclusion
Hetastarch pre- and co-loading were equally effective in the prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Under conditions of the study we were unable to detect any significant differences between the study groups, although we may have missed small differences in the primary outcome measure of vasopressor use. Based on our data, the difference is no more than 0.3 mL (95% confidence interval of 1.9 mL increase of vasopressor mix with pre-loading to a 1.1 mL decrease with
References (26)
- et al.
Rapid administration of crystalloid preload does not decrease the incidence of hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section
Br J Anaesth
(1992) - et al.
Volume preloading is not essential to prevent spinal-induced hypotension at caesarean section
Br J Anaesth
(1995) - et al.
Volume kinetics of Ringer’s solution during induction of spinal and general anaesthesia
Br J Anaesth
(2001) - et al.
Comparison of phenylephrine infusion regimens for maintaining maternal blood pressure during spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section
Br J Anaesth
(2004) - Cyna A M, Andrew M, Emmett R S, Middleton P, Simmons S W. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal...
- et al.
The effects of an increase of central blood volume before spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a qualitative systematic review
Anesth Analg
(2001) - et al.
Biochemical status and clinical condition of mother and infant at cesarean section
Anesth Analg
(1969) - et al.
Spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section
The influence of hypotension on neonatal outcome. Anaesthesia
(1982) - et al.
Spinal hypotension associated with Cesarean section: will preload ever work? Anesthesiology
(1999) - et al.
A reevaluation of the role of crystalloid preload in the prevention of hypotension associated with spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section
Anesthesiology
(1993)