Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02146898

The Severity Of Hypotension Comparing Three Positions During Spinal Anesthesia For Cesarean Delivery

The investigators intend to study the impact of patient positioning on the changes in blood pressure after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. The investigators hypothesized that the changes in blood pressure relate to the speed with which the spinal medication rises. By slowing the rise of spinal anesthesia, the investigators believe that the incidence and severity of hypotension might be reduced.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–50 year

Sex eligibility

Female

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Beth Isreal Deaconess Medical Center

Boston, Massachusetts, 02215, United States

About this study

Spinal anesthesia is the most commonly used anesthetic for cesarean delivery. In part, this is due to the ease of administration, reliability and low rates of adverse effects. Additionally, the avoidance of general anesthesia allows the parturient to participate in the birth experience, despite being in surgery.

Although hyperbaric local anesthetic solutions have a remarkable record of safety, their use is not totally without risk. The side effects of spinal anesthesia are well described, but most notably include hypotension (low blood pressure). Spinal hypotension is primarily due to the vasodilatory effects of local anesthetics, and would occur in virtually all women if not prevented or treated.

The incidence of hypotension in both the literature and in clinical practice ranges from 30% to 50% of all patients. Recent literature using a continuous, non-invasive blood pressure monitor suggests that hypotension occurs with greater frequency and may be associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects to either mother or fetus. The incidence and degree of hypotension have been associated with fetal acidosis, which is a sign of either poor perfusion of the placental bed, or increased metabolism due to the blood pressure medications.

The most effective treatment for spinal hypotension is uterine displacement using a hip wedge; the use of a hip wedge after spinal anesthesia is a standard of care. Other treatment, including fluid administration of either crystalloid or colloid, are either partially effective, clinical impractical, or result in administering large doses of medications that may have negative effects on the fetus.

Epidural anesthesia is associated with a reduction in the incidence and severity of hypotension compared with spinal anesthesia. This is believed to be due to the slower onset of sympathetic blockade with epidural anesthesia; this slow onset allows the physiologic compensation to changes in blood pressure. Unfortunately, the slower onset and lower reliability of epidural anesthesia prevents routine use in clinical practice for cesarean delivery.

The investigators hypothesize that the position patients are in during spinal placement might play a role in the severity of maternal hypotension. Interestingly, very few studies have investigated this posibility. Gori, et al. (1) studied influence of seated versus lateral positioning for spinal placement in Cesarean section. They found no significant differences in onset times, Bromage score for motor block, recovery dynamics, and use of ephedrine in two different positions; however, they did not compare the incidence and severity of spinal hypotension. Yun, et al. (2) found that the severity and duration of hypotension were greater when hyperbaric bupivacaine and fentanyl were induced in the sitting position compared to lateral.

Of notice, in all these studies, the authors focused on the immediate positions when the spinal mediation was injected; none has examined the effect of positioning after injection during phase when spinal anesthesia is rising.

Density differences between intrathecal injectate and CSF may explain the observed postural differences in extent of sensory block. Thus, the height of spinal anesthesia blockade could be affected by patient positioning during and after spinal injection. A small incline in positioning immediately after spinal injection may slow the rise of spinal blockade without affecting the duration of spinal anesthesia. In the current protocol, the investigators hypothesize that by slowing the rise of spinal anesthesia, the investigators might reduce the severity of hypotension.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Singleton pregnancy
  • Term gestation
  • Scheduled cesarean delivery
  • Spinal anesthesia for delivery

Exclusion criteria

  • Significant fetal concerns
  • Polyhydramnios
  • Macrosomia
  • Morbid obesity (BMI >40)
  • Chronic hypertension
  • Gestational hypertension
  • Preeclampsia
  • Type 1 diabetes
  • Contraindications to spinal anesthesia

Treatment and study plan

Position

Other

Primary outcomes

  1. change in blood pressure

    Time frame: 20 minutes

    percentage change in blood pressure after spinal anesthesia

Secondary outcomes

  1. IV fluid administration

    Time frame: 20 minutes

    Difference in IV fluid requirements

Other outcomes

  1. IV pressor requirements

    Time frame: 20 minutes

    Requirements for IV administration of vasopressors

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2013
Primary completion
2016
Study completion
2016
First posted
May 26, 2014
Registry last updated
Jan 4, 2017

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.