Anesthesia for cesarean section and SARS Cov-2: Observational study in Peru

0Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction Information regarding the clinical behavior and the anesthetic and perioperative management in pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 is starting to appear in the literature in the form of case reports or case series. However, strong evidence and recommendations are still limited. Objective To describe the clinical characteristics, the results of anesthetic and perioperative management, and complications in seroprevalent pregnant women for SARS-CoV-2 infection, delivered by cesarean section. Methodology Observational study in which 107 clinical records of pregnant women who were seroprevalent for SARS-CoV-2 infection were reviewed and analyzed between April and June, 2020. Demographic, clinical and serological data were collected, as well as data on the anesthetic technique and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Results Of the 107 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 99 (92.52%) were asymptomatic and 8 (7.48%) had mild symptoms. The most frequent reasons for cesarean section were cephalopelvic disproportion in 20 (18.68%), previous cesarean section in 20 (18.68%) and non-reassuring fetal status in 14 (13.08%). Anesthesia technique was neuraxial in all cases, with spinal used in 100 (93.5%), combined spinal-epidural in 4 (3.7%) and epidural catheter in 3 (2.8%) patients. No deaths had occurred until the third postoperative day of follow-up. Conclusions The majority of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic. In this work, spinal, combined spinal-epidural and epidural neuroxial anesthesia techniques were shown to be effective and safe for these patients and their newborn babies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bernabé, M. E. H., Lozano, M. L. C., Gonzáles, Á. R. M., & Rojas, J. G. V. (2021). Anesthesia for cesarean section and SARS Cov-2: Observational study in Peru. Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology, 49(4). https://doi.org/10.5554/22562087.e998

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free