Comparison of Sensory Block Levels with Crystalloid and Colloid Preloading in Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Study
Abstract
Background: Spinal anesthesia is widely used for cesarean deliveries due to its effectiveness and safety. However, it often causes post-anesthesia hypotension, which poses risks to both the mother and baby. Fluid preloading is a common method to prevent hypotension, yet the ideal type and volume of fluid remain uncertain. This research investigates how crystalloid and colloid preloading influence sensory block levels and hemodynamic stability during spinal anesthesia for cesarean sections.
Methods: Conducted as a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial at Imam Hossein Hospital in Tehran, Iran, from January to June 2022, this study involved 141 women undergoing elective cesarean sections under spinal anesthesia. Participants were randomly divided into three groups: normal saline, Ringer's lactate, or 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4). Sensory block levels were assessed every 5 minutes for the first 30 minutes and then at 60 and 90 minutes post-anesthesia. Continuous monitoring of hemodynamic parameters, such as systolic blood pressure and heart rate, was performed throughout the procedure.
Results: The findings revealed that normal saline achieved the highest maximum sensory block level. Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) showed a slightly longer duration of the block and a reduced incidence of hypotension. Despite these trends, the observed differences among the groups were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the choice of preload fluid influences sensory block characteristics and hemodynamic stability during spinal anesthesia for cesarean sections. Additional research with larger sample sizes is necessary to refine fluid management strategies in this context.
[2] Dyer RA, Reed AR, Van Dyk D, Arcache MJ, Hodges O, Lombard CJ, et al. Hemodynamic effects of ephedrine, phenylephrine, and the coadministration of phenylephrine with oxytocin during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology. 2009; 111(4):753-65.
[3] Theodoraki K, Hadzilia S, Valsamidis D, Kalopita K, Stamatakis E. Colloid Preload versus Crystalloid Co-Load in the Setting of Norepinephrine Infusion during Cesarean Section: Time and Type of Administered Fluids Do Not Matter. J Clin Med. 2023; 12(14):4754.
[4] Sang L, Wang H, Tian Y. Analysis, Design and Experimental Research of a Novel Bilateral Patient Transfer Robot. Machines. 2022; 10(1):33.
[5] Quan ZF, He HL, Tian M, Chi P, Li X. Influence of lateral decubitus positioning after combined use of hyperbaric and hypobaric ropivacaine on hemodynamic characteristics in spinal anesthesia for caesarean section. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014; 7(12):5669-74.
[6] Shin BS, Kim CS, Sim WS, Lee CJ, Kim ST, Kim GH, et al. A comparison of the effects of preanesthetic administration of crystalloid versus colloid on intrathecal spread of isobaric spinal anesthetics and cerebrospinal fluid movement. Anesth Analg. 2011; 112(4):924–30.
[7] Dehghani A, Mohammadi Pph, Mohammadzadeh Lm, Aidee M, Zaynalzadeh Ah. Prevalent comparison with normal saline and voluven on distribution of sensory block with bupivacaine hyperbaric in spinal anesthesia in women under elective cesarean section: a double-blind clinical trial. 2019; 40(4):23-31.
[8] Rollin B. Power/Sample Size Calculator [Internet]. University of British Columbia; 2019 [cited 2022 Jul 8]. Available from: https://riskcalc.org/samplesize/#
[9] Khosravi F, Alishahi M, Khanchemehr Y, Jarineshin H. A Comparison Between the Effects of Preloading with Ringer’s Solution and Voluven on Hemodynamic Changes in Patients Undergoing Elective Cesarean Section Under Spinal Anesthesia. Med Arch. 2019; 73(1):44–8.
[10] Memary E, Mirkheshti A, Mogddam MJ, Abtahi D, Yaseri M, Kamali F. Comparison of the Effects of Pre-Anesthetic Administration of Normal Saline, Ringer and Voluven on the Spread of Sensory Block With Hyperbaric Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia. Anesth Pain Med. 2014 May 12;4(2):e17939.
[11] Saghafinia M, Jalali A, Eskandari M, Eskandari N, Lak M. The Effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch 6% and Crystalloid on Volume Preloading Changes following Spinal Anesthesia. Adv Biomed Res. 2017; 6:115.
[12] Mercier FJ, Diemunsch P, Ducloy-Bouthors AS, Mignon A, Fischler M, Malinovsky JM, et al. 6% Hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) vs Ringer’s lactate preloading before spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery: The randomized, double-blind, multicentre CAESAR trial. Br J Anaesth; 113(3):459–67.
[13] Madi-Jebara S, Ghosn A, Sleilaty G, Richa F, Cherfane A, Haddad F, et al. Prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (Voluven) versus lactated Ringer’s solution. J Med Liban. 2008;56(4):203–7.
[14] Mandal M, Chattopadhyay S, Bagchi T, Chakrabarti S. Comparison of crystalloid and colloid preload on maternal hemodynamics in elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Int J Res Med Sci. 2016; 2428–35.
[15] Chooi C, Cox JJ, Lumb RS, Middleton P, Chemali M, Emmett RS, et al. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020; 7(7):CD002251
[16] Alimian M, Mohseni M, Safaeian R, Faiz SHR, Majedi MA. Comparison of hydroxyethyl starch 6% and crystalloids for preloading in elective caesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Med Arch. 2014;68(4):279–81.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Article in Press |
|
| Section | Research Article(s) | |
| Keywords | ||
| Spinal Anesthesia Cesarean Section Crystalloid Solution Colloid | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
