Epidural anaesthesia and myomectomy-associated blood loss: - a prospective randomised controlled study
Ginekologia polska. 2022
OBJECTIVES The management of anaesthesia for patients with large myomas is particularly important due to disruption of hemodynamic as a result of massive haemorrhage, the prolonged duration of surgery and requirement for additional interventions. This study evaluated the effect of anaesthetic technique on blood loss in patients undergoing myomectomy due to large fibroid uterus. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 156 patients that underwent myomectomy were randomized into two equal groups according to the type of anaesthesia: Epidural anaesthesia group and General anaesthesia group. The volume of blood loss and blood products transfusion was reviewed for each patient. RESULTS The intraoperative blood loss and need for blood transfusion were significantly higher in general anaesthesia group (p < 0.001). The mean hematocrit change was 2.5 ± 1.5 vs 3.7 ± 2.9 % (p = 0.001) for both groups. CONCLUSIONS In the myomectomy planning of women with a large fibroid uterus, the team of gynecologists and anaesthesiologists should take care to choose the most optimal technique for anaesthesia.
The safty profile of blood salvage applied for collected blood with amniotic fluid during cesarean section
BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2022;22(1):160
BACKGROUND The guidelines of National Health Service(NHS, the United Kingdom) recommended for use in obstetrics at increased risk of bleeding, requiring two suction devices to reduce amniotic fluid contamination, however, when comes to massive hemorrhage, it is may difficult to operate because the complex operation may delay time. The aim of the study was to detect the effect of amniotic fluid recovery on intraoperative cell salvage in obstetrics and provide evidence for clinical applications. METHOD Thirty-four patients undergoing elective cesarean section were randomly divided into two groups. In group 1, the cumulative blood from the operation field, including the amniotic fluid, was collected using a single suction device for processing. In group 2, after suctioning away the amniotic fluid using another suction device for the cumulative blood from the operation field. From each group, four samples were taken, including maternal venous blood (sample I), blood before washing (sample II), blood after washing (sample III) and blood after filtration with a leukocyte filter (sample IV), to detect serum potassium (K +), hemoglobin (Hb), white blood cell (WBC), fetal hemoglobin (HbF), alpha fetoprotein (AFP) and squamous cell (SC) levels. RESULTS The AFP, K + and WBC levels of sample III and sample IV were significantly lower than sample I in group 1 and group 2 (P < 0.05). Significantly more SCs were found in sample III than in sample I in group 1 and group 2 (P < 0.05), but SCs of sample IV had no statistical difference compared to sample I in group 1 and group 2 (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the K + , Hb, WBC, AFP and SC levels of sample IV between group 1 and group 2 (P > 0.05). The HbF levels of sample III and sample IV were significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION There is little or no possibility for AF contamination to enter the re-infusion system when used in conjunction with a leucodepletion filter. For maternal with Rh-negative blood, we recommend two suction devices to reduce HbF pollution. TRIAL REGISTRATION ChiCTR1800015684 , 2018.4.15.
Safety and efficacy of lidocaine plus epinephrine on intraoperative bleeding in abdominal myomectomy: A double-blind clinical trial
Health science reports. 2022;5(2):e551
BACKGROUND Uterine fibroid is a common benign pelvic tumor and abdominal myomectomy may cause excessive intraoperative bleeding, which may lead to adverse outcomes. OBJECTIVE This study was planned to evaluate the effectiveness of the injection of lidocaine plus epinephrine to reduce intraoperative bleeding in abdominal myomectomy. METHODS During October 2019 and May 2020, 60 eligible women with uterine fibroids were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. Our patients were divided into two groups of lidocaine plus epinephrine defined as Group L and placebo defined as Group P. In group L, lidocaine 3 mg/kg plus 0.5 ml of adrenaline which reached to 50 cc with saline solution and in group P, 50 ml of normal saline was used. Both the combined solution and normal saline were infiltrated to the serous and myometrium above and around the fibroid before incision. Patients' demographic data, total operative time, hemoglobin changes, and the degree of surgical difficulty were evaluated and compared between the two groups. RESULTS There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographic data. Hemoglobin changes (p < 0.0001) and the degree of surgery difficulty (p = 0.01) were significantly lower in Group L compared with Group P. In each group the drop in hemoglobin levels from baseline to 4 h postoperatively was significant (p < 0.0001). A significantly meaningful correlation was reported between hemoglobin changes and the degree of surgery difficulty with the size of the uterine and fibroids (p < 0.05). While a negative correlation was found regarding gravidity and surgery difficulty (r = -0.413, p = 0.02). Surgery duration was longer in Group P compared with Group L 70.66 ± 19.85 versus 66.16 ± 14.48, respectively, but with no significant difference (p = 0.32). No significant adverse reaction or serious complication was reported in the two groups. Hemodynamic parameters were kept in the normal range throughout the surgery. CONCLUSION A combination of lidocaine plus epinephrine during abdominal myomectomy appears to be a safe and effective method in reducing blood loss.
Value of intrauterine platelet-rich concentrates in patients with intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. 2022;271:63-70
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the value of intrauterine platelet-rich concentrates among patients with intrauterine adhesions (IUAs) after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. METHODS Four different databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ISI web of science) were searched for the available studies from inception to November 2021. We selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared platelet-rich concentrates in the intervention group versus no injection of platelet-rich concentrates in the control group among women with intrauterine adhesions after operative hysteroscopy. Revman software was utilized for performing our meta-analysis. Our primary outcomes were the adhesion score and incidence of recurrence of severe intrauterine adhesions postoperatively. Our secondary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate, menstrual flow duration in days, and menstrual flow amount (number of pads). RESULTS Five RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 329 patients. We found that platelet-rich concentrates were linked to a significant reduction in the postoperative adhesion score (MD = -1.00, 95% CI [-1.68, -0.32], p = 0.004). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in the incidence of severe IUAs recurrence among the platelet-rich concentrates group (7.6%) compared to the control group (23.4%) after hysteroscopy (p = 0.001). The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly increased among the platelet-rich concentrates group (37.1%) in comparison with the control group (20.7%) after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis (p = 0.008). There were significant improvements in the menstrual flow duration and amount among the platelet-rich concentrates group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Intrauterine placement of platelet-rich concentrates is an effective method for the treatment of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopy.
Tranexamic Acid for Prevention of Hemorrhage in Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery - A Randomized Study
American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM. 2022;:100573
BACKGROUND The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states that data is insufficient to recommend Tranexamic acid (TXA) prophylaxis for postpartum hemorrhage. OBJECTIVE This study's objective was to evaluate if prophylactic TXA reduces calculated blood loss versus placebo in women undergoing elective repeat cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, examining calculated blood loss with prophylactic doses of 1-gram of TXA given before skin incision and after placental delivery and standard uterotonics in women with singleton pregnancies at least 37 weeks' gestation, presenting for their second or third cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia. The primary outcome was calculated blood loss at 24 hours. The calculation was based on the participant's height, weight, and the difference in hematocrit before the start of surgery and 24 hours after delivery. Prespecified secondary outcomes were quantification of maternal coagulation activity during the perioperative course. A sample size of 50 women per group was planned (N=100), based on a meta-analysis of mean reduction in blood loss after TXA. RESULTS 723 women were screened, and 110 women were randomized as follows: 55 to TXA and 55 to placebo. The primary outcome of mean calculated blood for TXA (2274 ± 469 mL) and the placebo group (2407 ± 388 mL), p > 0.05. In the secondary outcomes, D-dimer levels were lower in the TXA group than the placebo group 24 hours after delivery (2.1 ± 1.2 µg/mL versus 4.3 ± 2.4 µg/mL), p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic tranexamic acid did not decrease mean calculated blood loss. Significantly less participants had calculated blood loss greater than 2000 mL in the tranexamic acid group compared to the placebo group with lower levels of D-dimer at 24 hours.
Women undergoing elective repeat caesarean delivery (n= 110).
Prophylactic doses of tranexamic acid (TXA) before skin incision and after placental delivery (n= 55).
Standard uterotonics (n= 55).
The mean calculated blood loss for TXA was 2,274 ± 469 mL, and for standard uterotonics was 2407 ± 388 mL. D-dimer levels were lower in the TXA group than the placebo group 24 hours after delivery (2.1 ± 1.2 µg/mL vs. 4.3 ± 2.4 µg/mL).
Perioperative prophylactic internal iliac artery balloon occlusion for prevention of postpartum haemorrhage in placenta praevia: a randomised controlled trial (abridged secondary publication)
Hong Kong medical journal = Xianggang yi xue za zhi. 2022;28 Suppl 1(1):23-26
Intraoperative Cell Salvage for Women at High Risk of Postpartum Hemorrhage During Cesarean Section: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.). 2022
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) can lead to substantial blood loss that compromises maternal hemodynamic stability and consequently cause severe maternal complications such as organ dysfunction or death. Intraoperative cell salvage (IOCS), an effective method of blood conservation used in other surgical specialties, can be an alternative intervention for managing PPH. Thus, our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IOCS for women at high risk of PPH undergoing cesarean sections. We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases from inception to February 25, 2021 for randomized controlled studies and observational studies published in English or Mandarin about IOCS use in cesarean sections. Primary outcomes of interest were changes in postoperative hematologic parameters and any adverse events reported among patients that had IOCS and controls that had an allogeneic blood transfusion. The certainty of the evidence of the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A total of 24 studies with 5872 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Eleven randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 13 observational studies were analyzed. Postoperative hemoglobin levels were higher among patients with IOCS SMD 0.39 (95% CI; 0.20, 0.60; P < 0.001, high certainty). Allogeneic blood transfusion increased adverse events RR = 1.81(95% CI; 1.24, 2.62; P = 0.002, low certainty). IOCS shortened hospital stay SMD - 0.59 (95% CI: - 0.98, - 0.19; P = 0.004, low certainty) and shortened prothrombin time SMD - 0.67 (95% CI; - 1.31, - 0.04), P = 0.037, low certainty). The lower incidence of transfusion-related adverse events and shorter hospital stay among other findings demonstrate that IOCS use in obstetrics is an effective and safe alternative for the management of PPH; however, high-quality randomized control studies are required to confirm this evidence.
Colloid coload versus crystalloid coload to prevent maternal hypotension in women receiving prophylactic phenylephrine infusion during caesarean delivery: a randomised controlled trial
International journal of obstetric anesthesia. 2022;49:103246
BACKGROUND The optimal fluid strategy to prevent maternal hypotension during caesarean delivery remains unclear. This study aim was to compare the incidence of post-spinal anaesthesia hypotension in women receiving either colloid or crystalloid coload in the setting of prophylactic phenylephrine infusion during caesarean delivery. METHODS Healthy mothers undergoing elective caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia were randomised to receive a rapid intravenous coload with 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 10 mL/kg (colloid group) or balanced crystalloid solution (Plasma Solution A) 10 mL/kg (crystalloid group) during spinal anaesthesia. All women had a prophylactic phenylephrine infusion initiated at 25 μg/min immediately after the subarachnoid block and titrated to systolic blood pressure using a standardised protocol. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension (systolic blood pressure <80% of baseline) until delivery. RESULTS The incidence of hypotension was 50% in the colloid group and 62% in the crystalloid group (absolute difference, -12% [95% CI -33% to 9%]; relative risk, 0.8 [95% CI 0.56 to 1.14]; P=0.314). No significant difference between groups was found in the number of hypotensive episodes (median 0.5 [IQR 0 to 1] vs 1 [0 to 2], P=0.132) or phenylephrine dose (675 [IQR 425 to 975] μg vs 750 [625 to 950] μg, P=0.109). The incidence of severe hypotension, symptomatic hypotension, bradycardia, nausea, and the neonatal outcomes were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS This study found no benefit of colloid coload compared with crystalloid coload for preventing maternal hypotension in the presence of prophylactic phenylephrine infusion during caesarean delivery.
Prophylactic use of platelet-rich plasma for post-spinal low back pain following gynecological surgery: a randomized clinical trial
Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). 2021
BACKGROUND Post-spinal back pain is suggested to occur as a result of a localized inflammatory response that is often associated with some degree of muscle spasm. We aimed to evaluate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in reducing the incidence of post-spinal back pain. METHODS One hundred patients were randomly enrolled and scheduled for elective gynecological surgery under spinal anesthesia. After the subarachnoid block, group A (placebo) received 2 mL of sodium chloride 0.9% injected into the track of spinal needle during its withdrawal (2 mm after outward withdrawal in muscles and subcutaneous tissues). While patients in group B (PRP); received 2 ml of PRP injected into the track of the spinal needle during its withdrawal. The primary outcome was the number of patients who developed post-spinal low back pain within the first week following the subarachnoid block. Secondary outcomes included the time of the first analgesic request and total meperidine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS Fifteen patients in the PRP group developed low back pain during the first week following subarachnoid block compared to 26 patients in the placebo group (p = 0.037). There was a significant decrease in the mean meperidine consumption during first 24 h postoperatively in PRP group (174 ± 14 mg) compared to placebo group (210 ± 22 mg) (p < 0.0001). Also, the first analgesic request was significantly delayed in PRP group (243 ± 21 min.) compared to placebo group (185 ± 31 min.) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION This study demonstrated the positive effects of platelet-rich plasma on the prevention of post-spinal backache.
Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2021;2:Cd000329
BACKGROUND Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is common in otherwise healthy women of reproductive age, and can affect physical health and quality of life. Surgery is usually a second-line treatment of HMB. Endometrial resection/ablation (EA/ER) to remove or ablate the endometrium is less invasive than hysterectomy. Hysterectomy is the definitive treatment and can be via open (laparotomy) approach, or via minimally invasive approaches (vaginally or laparoscopically). Each approach has its own advantages and risk profile. OBJECTIVES To compare the effectiveness, acceptability and safety of endometrial resection or ablation versus different routes of hysterectomy (open, minimally invasive hysterectomy, or unspecified route) for the treatment of HMB. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (July 2020), and reference lists, grey literature and trial registers. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared techniques of endometrial resection/ablation with hysterectomy (by any technique) for the treatment of HMB in premenopausal women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included 10 RCTs (1966 participants) comparing EA/ER to hysterectomy (open (abdominal), minimally invasive (laparoscopic or vaginal), or unspecified (or at surgeon's discretion) route of hysterectomy). The results were rated as moderate-, low- and very low-certainty evidence. Endometrial resection/ablation versus open hysterectomy We found two trials. Women having EA/ER are probably less likely to perceive an improvement in HMB compared to women having open hysterectomy (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.95; 2 studies, 247 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably have a 13% risk of requiring further surgery for treatment failure (compared to 0 on the open hysterectomy group; 2 studies, 247 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Both treatments probably lead to similar quality of life at two years (mean difference (MD) -5.30, 95% CI -11.90 to 1.30; 1 study, 155 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and satisfaction rate at one year (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 1 study, 194 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.20; 2 studies, 247 women; low-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably reduces time to return to normal activity compared to open hysterectomy (MD -21.00 days, 95% CI -24.78 to -17.22; 1 study, 197 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Endometrial resection/ablation versus minimally invasive hysterectomy We found five trials. The proportion of women with perception of improvement in HMB at two years may be similar between groups (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.04; 1 study, 79 women; low-certainty evidence). Blood loss may be higher in the EA/ER group when assessed using the Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart (MD 44.00, 95% CI 36.09 to 51.91; 1 study, 68 women; low-certainty evidence). Quality of life is probably lower in the EA/ER group compared to the minimally invasive hysterectomy group at two years according to the 36-item Short Form (SF-36) (MD -10.71, 95% CI -15.11 to -6.30; 2 studies, 145 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95; 1 study, 616 women; moderate-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably increases the risk of further surgery for HMB compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy (RR 7.70, 95% CI 2.54 to 23.32; 4 studies, 922 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and treatments probably have similar rates of any serious adverse events (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.59; 4 studies, 809 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Women with EA/ER are probably less likely to be satisfied with treatment at one year (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.94; 1 study, 558 women; moderate-certainty evidence). We were unable to pool data for time to return to work or normal life because of extreme heterogeneity (99%); however, the three studies reporting this all had the same direction of effect favouring EA/ER. Endometrial resection/ablation versus unspecified route of hysterectomy We found three trials. EA/ER may lead to a lower perception of improvement in HMB compared to unspecified route of hysterectomy (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.95; 2 studies, 403 women; low-certainty evidence). Although EA/ER may lead to similar quality of life using the SF-36 General Health Perception at two years' follow-up (MD -1.90, 95% CI -8.67 to 4.87; 1 study, 209 women; low-certainty evidence), the proportion of women with improvement in general health at one year may be lower (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95; 1 study, 185 women; low-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably has a risk of 5.4% of requiring further surgery for treatment failure (compared to 0 with total hysterectomy; 2 studies, 374 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and reduces the proportion of women with any serious adverse event (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.80; 2 studies, 374 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Both treatments probably lead to a similar satisfaction rate at one year' follow-up (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04; 3 studies, 545 women; moderate-certainty evidence). EA/ER may lead to shorter time to return to normal activity (MD -18.90 days, 95% CI -24.63 to -13.17; 1 study, 172 women; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Endometrial resection/ablation (EA/ER) offers an alternative to hysterectomy as a surgical treatment for HMB. Effectiveness varies with EA/ER compared to different hysterectomy approaches. The perception of improvement in HMB with EA/ER is probably lower compared to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but may be similar compared to minimally invasive. Quality of life with EA/ER is probably similar to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but lower compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy. Further surgery for treatment failure is probably more likely with EA/ER compared to all routes of hysterectomy. Satisfaction rates also vary. EA/ER probably has a similar rate of satisfaction compared to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but a lower rate of satisfaction compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy. The proportion having any serious adverse event appears similar in all groups, but specific adverse events did reported difference between EA/ER and different routes. We were unable to draw conclusions about the time to return to normal activity, but the direction of effect suggests it is likely to be shorter with EA/ER.