Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Copyright 2009, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
preservation of cardiac output (CO) may be as important. A complete understanding of the hemodynamic
responses to SA and to the administration of vasopressors would thus be of importance in the appropriate
choice of vasopressor and dose in this clinical situation.
The effects of the two commonly used vasopressors,
ephedrine and phenylephrine, on neonatal acid base
status, a surrogate marker for neonatal wellbeing, have
been extensively studied during SA for CD. Recent work
shows that ephedrine is associated with a greater degree
of neonatal acidosis than phenylephrine, probably on
the basis that ephedrine crosses the placenta and causes
a b-adrenergically mediated increase in fetal metabolic
rate. This, together with a lower incidence of maternal
symptoms, has led to a change in practice and a resurgence of the use of phenylephrine for spinal hypotension.1 There have been very few investigations comparing the effects of the two vasopressors on maternal
cardiovascular indices other than HR and blood pressure
during SA for CD. Only one previously published study,
employing intermittent suprasternal Doppler flow measurements, has compared CO changes using the two
vasopressors during SA for CD. In this study, which
compared bolus doses of the vasopressors, bradycardia
in the phenylephrine group was treated with atropine,
which makes the results difficult to interpret.2 The primary outcome variable in this study was umbilical artery
pH, and not maternal hemodynamic changes. There
have been no investigations using beat-by-beat CO measurements. There is currently a condition of equipoise
with regards to the use of the two vasopressors, as far as
the restoration of maternal blood pressure is concerned.
Our hypothesis, based on the limited literature and a
study on patients with severe preeclampsia during SA for
CD in our institution,3 is that phenylephrine, but not
ephedrine, decreases CO when administered in response to hypotension during SA for CD. Thus phenylephrine might be the better agent to restore systemic
vascular resistance (SVR) to normal when hypotension is
associated with vasodilation and a partial compensatory
increase in CO in response to SA.4 Ephedrine may be a
better choice should severe hypotension and bradycardia occur, reflecting decreased CO. The primary outcome of our prospective randomized, double-blind study
was thus a comparison of the time-based effects on
maternal CO of bolus administration of the vasopressors
phenylephrine and ephedrine during SA for CD. The
753
754
DYER ET AL.
LiDCOplus monitor (LiDCO, Cambridge, United Kingdom), which employs pulse wave form analysis calibrated with lithium dilution, was employed for the
study. In addition, a monitor of transthoracic bioimpedance changes was also used in each patient to corroborate the results.
Secondary outcomes were the effects of SA on maternal hemodynamics, a comparison of the effects of oxytocin on maternal CO as measured by the two monitors
and the effects of the coadministration of phenylephrine
with oxytocin in obtunding the unwanted hemodynamic
effects of oxytocin. Also recorded were neonatal Apgar scores, umbilical arterial and venous pH, and base
deficit.
755
100 ml of crystalloid solution was administered thereafter, unless blood loss, estimated from suction bottle
measurement and inspection of swabs, was excessive; in
which case, the patient would be excluded from treatment via the trial protocol and would be treated per the
usual protocol for blood loss. All patients received 2.0 ml
of hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine (10 mg) plus 10 mg of
fentanyl administered over 20 s at the L3/4 interspace.
After 20 s in the sitting position, patients were positioned supine, with at least 15 degrees of left lateral tilt,
to minimize aortocaval compression. Block height was
assessed by using cold sensitivity to ethyl chloride spray.
No supplemental oxygen was administered unless oxygen saturation decreased to less than 92%.
The anesthesiologist, blinded to the LiDCOplus and
BioZ measurements, responded to HR and MAP changes
as is normal clinical practice during SA for CD. One 5-ml
syringe containing the randomly assigned vasopressor,
and another containing the alternative vasopressor (i.e.,
either 80 mg/ml phenylephrine or 10 mg/ml ephedrine
in water) were prepared by an anesthesiologist not involved with the intraoperative management. If MAP decreased by 20% from the baseline value, 1 ml of the
randomly assigned vasopressor was administered every
60 s until MAP recovered to within 20% of baseline.
Randomization would thus only be done at the point
when a vasopressor intervention was indicated.
Should MAP continue to decrease to 40% below baseline after 45 s, a rescue dose of the same vasopressor
would be given. Should MAP not be restored to within
20% of baseline after two successive doses of vasopressor within 2 min, the alternative vasopressor would be
used, according to the same protocol. The anesthesiologist performing SA was blinded to the vasopressor
used. Should HR decrease to less than 55 beats/min in
association with severe hypotension (30% below baseline), atropine 0.5 mg and ephedrine 10 mg would be
administered. In the event of severe hypotension unresponsive to atropine and ephedrine, adrenaline would
be administered in titrated boluses. After a total of 5
doses of the same vasopressor, if MAP again decreased
by more than 20% of baseline, the alternative vasopressor was used. No patient was to be given more than 5
doses of ephedrine (50 mg) because this would be interpreted as tachyphylaxis.
Thirty seconds after delivery, 2.5 IU of oxytocin in 10
ml of water was administered intravenously over a period of 30 s to all patients receiving ephedrine before
delivery and to all other patients except for a subgroup
of 20 consecutive patients not having received ephedrine before delivery. These 20 patients were randomized
to receive intravenously either 2.5 IU of oxytocin or 2.5
IU of oxytocin mixed with 80 mg of phenylephrine in 10
ml of water over a period of 30 s starting 30 s after
delivery. For this purpose, a preprepared sealed envelope was opened immediately before delivery. The an-
DYER ET AL.
756
Results
Forty-three patients were recruited to this prospective
randomized study, between November 20, 2007 and
757
Ephedrine pre, mg
Ephedrine post, mg
Phenylephrine pre, mg
Phenylephrine post, mg
Group P (n 5 20)
Dose (mg)
Range
Dose (mg)
Range
9
18
0
6
22.2
21.7
0
293.3
1040
1050
80640
0
13
12
20
0
24.6
166.7
266
1050
80240
80800
Group E 5 ephedrine; Group P 5 phenylephrine as the vasopressor of first use; pre 5 vasopressor administered predelivery; post 5 vasopressor administered
postdelivery. Most patients receiving vasopressor before delivery also received vasopressor postdelivery.
Demographic and relevant data pertaining to anesthesia, surgery, and neonatal outcome appear in table 2.
Considering patients receiving vasopressor predelivery,
there were significant between-group differences in
standard bicarbonate, umbilical arterial base excess, and
umbilical arterial PO2. There were no other betweengroup differences, and no patients required analgesic
supplementation. The occurrence of nausea and vomiting was recorded after the first vasopressor administered. This occurred in four patients who received
ephedrine as the initial vasopressor, and two patients
who receive phenylephrine (ns).
The primary outcome of this study was a comparison
of the change in CO after the first administration of
ephedrine or phenylephrine in response to hypotension.
Tables 3 and 4 show hemodynamic data at baseline, at
the time of randomization to the vasopressor (i.e., at
target mean arterial blood pressure or 80% of baseline)
and after vasopressor administration. There were no
significant between-group differences in any measure
Table 2. Demographic and Relevant Data Pertaining to Anesthesia, Surgery, and Neonatal Outcome
Group E
Height, cm
Weight, kg
Age, yr
Gravidity, n
Parity, n
Uterine incision, s
Delivery, s
Coload Volume, ml
Coload Time, s
Block Height
Blood loss, ml
Apgar 1 min
Apgar 5 min
UA pH*
UA PCO2*, kPa
UA PO2*, kPa
UA SBC*, mmol/l
UA Base excess*, mmol/l
Group P
Mean/Median
SD/Range
Mean/Median
SD/Range
P Value
158.4
76.9
26.4
2
1
917
73
1,537
1,274
T3
398
9
9
7.28
6.48
2.02
18.83
4.75
6.5
11.8
4.1
14
02
185
28
234
435
T2T5
44
710
910
0.06
1.82
0.51
2.25
3.04
156.6
73.7
27.1
2
1
940
86
1,480
1,259
T3
378
9
9.5
7.31
6.98
1.59
21.28
1.34
5.7
11.8
3.7
14
02
226
33
264
416
T2T5
30
69
910
0.04
1.12
0.39
2.45
3.06
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.049
0.036
0.025
* Data pertains to patients who received vasopressor predelivery (n 5 9 in Group E, n 5 12 in Group P).
Delivery 5 time from uterine incision to delivery; Group E 5 ephedrine; Group P 5 phenylephrine as the vasopressor of first use; PCO2 5 partial pressure of
carbon dioxide; PO2 5 partial pressure of oxygen; SBC 5 standard bicarbonate; UA 5 umbilical arterial; uterine incision 5 time from induction of spinal
anesthesia to uterine incision.
DYER ET AL.
758
Baseline
HR, beats/min
MAP, mmHg
SV, ml/beat
SVR, Dyne s cm25
CO(LiDCO), l/min
CO(BioZ), l/min
Prevasopressor
HR, beats/min
MAP, mmHg
SV, ml/beat
SVR, Dyne s cm25
CO(LiDCO), l/min
CO(BioZ), l/min
Group P (n 5 20)
95% CI
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Difference
Lower Limit
Upper Limit
P Value
83.6
90.5
73.7
1177.5
6.2
5.3
9.8
10.3
15.2
315.6
1.6
0.8
80.4
91.5
73.5
1241.2
5.8
4.6
10.7
10.9
18.2
266.9
1.2
0.9
3.2
1.0
0.2
63.7
0.4
0.7
3.5
7.9
10.7
253.0
0.6
0.1
9.9
5.9
11.1
125.6
1.3
1.2
0.3375
0.7776
0.9747
0.4994
0.4322
0.0202
91.7
71.8
85.7
746.1
7.9
6.1
12.7
7.1
21.0
272.4
2.4
1.1
91.5
72.8
80.2
782.6
7.2
5.7
17.6
7.1
16.1
169.3
1.4
1.6
0.1
1.0
5.5
36.5
0.7
0.5
10.1
5.7
6.8
184.1
0.6
0.4
10.3
3.7
17.7
111.1
2.0
1.4
0.9772
0.6560
0.3705
0.6190
0.3058
0.3024
CI 5 confidence interval; CO(LiDCO) and CO(BioZ) 5 cardiac output derived using the LiDCOplus (LiDCO, Cambridge, United Kingdom) and BioZ (Cardio
Dynamics International, San Diego, CA) monitors respectively; HR 5 heart rate; MAP 5 mean arterial pressure; prevasopressor 5 hemodynamic values prior to
the first administration of either vasopressor (at time of randomisation); SV 5 stroke volume; SVR 5 systemic vascular resistance.
759
Postvasopressor
HR
Absolute, beats/min
AUC
Peak, beats/min
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
MAP
Absolute, beats/min
AUC
Peak, beats/min
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
SV
Absolute, ml/beat
Peak, ml/beat
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
SVR
Absolute, Dyne s cm25
Peak, Dyne s cm25
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
CO(LiDCO)
Absolute, l/min
AUC
Peak, l/min
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
CO(BioZ)
Absolute, l/min
AUC
Peak, l/min
Percent-peak, %
Time to peak, s
Group P (n520)
95% CI
SD
Mean
SD
Difference
Lower Limit
Upper Limit
P Value*
92.4
59.9
97.2
7.0
66.3
12.4
812.7
13.3
14.8
37.2
76.9
2325.0
67.4
25.5
62.6
12.7
1638.0
11.7
9.8
35.3
15.5
2384.8
29.8
32.5
3.7
7.2
1518.6
21.6
24.3
37.2
23.8
3250.9
38.0
40.7
35.3
0.0005
,.0001
,.0001
,.0001
0.7547
78.2
1020.3
83.3
16.5
89.8
8.6
853.6
11.6
14.8
38.5
86.3
2104.2
98.5
35.7
61.8
9.1
1071.6
9.6
11.2
35.2
8.1
1084.0
15.2
19.2
28.0
13.9
1726.0
22.2
27.8
3.8
2.3
441.7
8.2
19.2
52.3
0.0078
0.0016
,.0001
,.0001
0.0247
87.9
89.4
5.7
83.2
20.0
20.0
12.6
40.2
81.4
80.2
0.1
76.4
17.2
20.8
17.7
48.7
6.5
9.2
5.6
6.8
5.7
4.3
4.6
22.8
18.7
22.7
15.9
36.4
0.2876
0.3705
0.2737
0.6441
782.8
822.6
14.7
83.6
265.4
315.7
37.1
46.5
1123.7
1450.5
86.0
35.4
259.7
370.0
30.7
17.2
340.9
627.9
71.3
48.3
513.8
855.5
93.7
25.7
168.0
400.3
49.0
70.9
0.0003
,.0001
,.0001
0.0004
8.1
26.9
9.0
16.0
58.8
2.0
150.4
2.7
19.5
36.2
6.2
160.6
5.2
27.8
32.2
1.3
122.7
1.4
10.7
11.1
1.9
187.4
3.8
43.8
26.6
0.8
97.5
2.1
33.6
9.4
3.1
277.4
4.0
54.0
43.9
0.0011
0.0002
,.0001
,.0001
0.0072
6.3
15.9
6.7
8.5
92.7
1.1
51.1
1.6
19.3
42.2
5.2
77.1
4.5
21.8
68.7
1.5
57.5
1.5
7.3
28.8
1.1
93.0
2.2
30.2
24.0
0.3
57.1
1.2
20.3
0.5
2.0
129.0
3.2
40.1
47.6
0.0111
,.0001
0.0001
,.0001
0.0459
terval, CO had increased significantly from baseline values, due to an increase in HR and SV. In patients not
requiring vasopressor before the preuterine incision
time interval, CO had also increased significantly as a
result of an increase in SV alone.
Figure 8A shows median smooth plots of the responses
(percentage change in HR, MAP, SV, and SVR from
preoxytocin values) of the 20 patients randomized to
receive either oxytocin 2.5 IU alone, or a mixture of
oxytocin 2.5 IU and phenylephrine 80 mg. Ensembles of
time-based changes in CO recorded by the LiDCOplus
and BioZ monitors are also shown (fig. 8B). Table 5
shows a detailed between-group comparison of hemodynamic parameters before and after administration of
oxytocin or the oxytocin/phenylephrine mixture. Absolute peak HR and CO were lower, and SVR and MAP
Anesthesiology, V 111, No 4, Oct 2009
760
DYER ET AL.
Fig. 2. (A) Percentage changes from prevasopressor values in cardiac output (CO,
as measured by LiDCOplus monitors;
LiDCO, Cambridge, United Kingdom),
heart rate (HR), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) after the administration of
vasopressor. Lines represent the median
smooth for each parameter. (B) Percentage changes from prevasopressor values,
in stroke volume (SV, as measured by
LiDCOplus monitors), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) after the administration of vasopressor. Lines represent
the median smooth for each parameter.
The bias at each measurement point was 1.0, 1.0, and 1.6
l/min, respectively. The limits of agreement at each measurement point were 1.8 to 3.7, 1.9 to 3.9, and 2.0 to
5.2 l/min, respectively.
Discussion
This prospective randomized comparison of the effects of phenylephrine and ephedrine on maternal hemodynamics during SA for CD showed that an 80-mg
bolus of phenylephrine caused a significantly lower maternal CO when compared to a 10-mg bolus dose of
ephedrine, during the 150 s after vasopressor administration. However, the mean postphenylephrine CO valAnesthesiology, V 111, No 4, Oct 2009
761
Fig. 3. Scatter plot showing the correlation between the percentage change in
peak heart rate with percentage change
in peak cardiac output from prevasopressor value, after vasopressor administration. For ephedrine: r 5 0.65, P 5 0.003;
for phenylephrine: r 5 0.87, P < 0.0001.
CO 5 cardiac output; E 5 Ephedrine; HR 5
heart rate; P 5 Phenylephrine.
762
Fig. 6. Between-group comparison of patients receiving vasopressor before and after delivery. Percentage changes from
prevasopressor values in CO (LiDCOplus monitors; LiDCO,
Cambridge, United Kingdom) and HR after the administration
of vasopressor. Lines represent the median smooth for each
parameter. CO 5 cardiac output; HR 5 heart rate.
DYER ET AL.
763
DYER ET AL.
764
Table 5. Hemodynamic Data before and after Oxytocin or Mixture of Oxytocin and Phenylephrine
Oxytocin
Plus Phenylephrine
(n 5 10)
Oxytocin
(n 5 10)
Preoxytocin
MAP
SV
SVR
HR
CO(LiDCO)
CO(BioZ)
Postoxytocin
SV
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
SVR
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
HR
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
MAP
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
CO(LiDCO)
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
CO(BioZ)
Peak
Percent-peak
Time to peak
95% Confidence
Interval
SD
Difference
92.42
82.98
967.2
90.54
7.52
5.76
15.02
13.84
213.3
13.49
1.87
1.29
1.95
7.83
140.0
4.55
1.13
0.56
15.92
20.85
90.36
18.15
2.63
1.69
12.01
5.19
370.43
9.06
0.38
0.57
0.7724
0.2223
0.2178
0.4917
0.1331
0.3086
14.60
20.99
33.59
82.69
0.79
67.52
11.99
14.48
39.54
10.59
25.33
14.21
1.96
8.39
48.68
23.14
42.27
20.26
0.0931
0.0056
0.3978
556.2
45.8
60.6
200.92
38.26
33.88
1329.00
41.24
106.60
354.29
34.93
24.06
772.80
86.99
45.98
1043.00
119.80
73.58
502.20
54.17
18.37
,0.0001
,0.0001
0.0026
98.2
15.9
71.2
19.66
22.79
35.77
74.35
16.37
115.52
12.87
19.42
26.70
23.85
32.27
44.32
8.24
12.38
73.98
39.46
52.16
14.67
0.0049
0.0031
0.0057
63.9
28.9
43.4
10.90
9.92
7.45
93.11
2.99
86.89
16.10
22.11
27.32
29.23
31.87
43.47
42.15
47.97
62.28
16.31
15.77
24.65
0.0002
0.0002
0.0006
9.1
45.3
62.9
3.00
41.57
36.31
6.66
9.33
84.83
2.20
28.88
40.03
2.48
54.64
21.97
0.00
21.01
57.88
4.95
88.27
13.94
0.0496
0.0031
0.2150
6.4
23.7
64.9
1.64
18.39
29.32
6.16
7.01
88.20
1.91
24.95
39.04
0.26
16.72
23.30
1.42
3.87
55.74
1.93
37.32
9.14
0.7494
0.1052
0.1486
Mean
SD
90.5
75.2
1107.2
86.0
6.4
5.2
14.70
13.87
273.4
15.40
1.28
1.11
93.3
26.1
53.3
Mean
Lower Limit
Upper Limit
P* Value
765
trends shown by the two CO monitors after both vasopressor and oxytocin administration lends further support to this form of pulse waveform analysis as a research tool.
References