Prolonged duration of epidural labour analgesia decreases the success rate of epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section

1Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To summarise the process of conversion of epidural labour analgesia to anaesthesia for caesarean delivery and explore the relationship between duration of labour analgesia and conversion. Methods: Parturients who underwent conversion from epidural labour analgesia to anaesthesia for caesarean delivery between May 2019 and April 2020 at the Chengdu Women’s and Children’s Central Hospital, Sichuan Maternal and Child Health Hospital, and Jinjiang District Maternal and Child Health Hospital were selected. If the position of the epidural catheter was correct and the effect was good, patients were converted to epidural surgical anaesthesia. If epidural labour analgesia was ineffective, spinal anaesthesia (SA) was administered immediately. For category-1 emergency caesarean sections, general anaesthesia (GA) was administered. Results: A total of 1084 parturients underwent conversion. Of these, 19 (1.9%) received GA due to the initiation of category-1 emergency caesarean section. 704 (64.9%) were converted to epidural surgical anaesthesia, 2 (0.2%) had failed conversions and were administered GA before delivery, and 357 (32.9%) were converted to SA. Logistic regression analysis showed that prolonged duration of epidural labour analgesia ([Crude odds ratio (OR)=1.065; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.037–1.094; p 8 h is associated with conversion failure. If it is impossible to judge whether the conversion is successful immediately, spinal anaesthesia should be administered to minimise complications.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jian, Z., Longqing, R., Dayuan, W., Fei, J., Bo, L., Gang, Z., … Yan, G. (2022). Prolonged duration of epidural labour analgesia decreases the success rate of epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section. Annals of Medicine, 54(1), 1112–1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2067353

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