Comparison between Hypertonic Saline (3%) and Normal Saline (0.9%) as a Preload before Spinal Anaesthesia in Caesarean Section | ||||
The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine | ||||
Article 30, Volume 72, Issue 10, July 2018, Page 5513-5516 PDF (153.06 K) | ||||
Document Type: Original Article | ||||
DOI: 10.21608/ejhm.2018.11388 | ||||
View on SCiNiTO | ||||
Authors | ||||
Fahmy Saad Latif; Dalia Ahmed Ibraheem; Amin Mohammed Alansary; Mariam Gamal Motawashleh Salama | ||||
Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care & Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University | ||||
Abstract | ||||
Background: spinal anesthesia is frequently used for cesarean delivery because of its rapid onset, a dense neural block, little risk of local anesthetic toxicity and minimal transfer of drug to the fetus. General anesthesia is preferred in emergency obstetric situations, such as cord prolapse, in which there is a need for reliable induction, and also bleeding placenta previa. Unfortunately it is frequently accompanied by hypotension, which may be defined in absolute terms as a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 90 or 100 mmHg or in relative terms as a percentage (20% fall from baseline). Aim of the Work: the aim of this study is to compare hypertonic saline (3%)and normal saline (0.9%) in preventing spinal induced hypotension. Patients and Methods: in our study, 40 patients were randomly divided into 2 equal groups: Group A: received hypertonic saline (3%) (4ml/kg) . Group B: received normal saline (0.9%)(13ml/kg). Results: our study showed that hypertonic saline (3%) was more effective than normal saline to prevent spinal induced hypotension and it did not affect the neonatal outcome. Conclusion: neonatal outcome was excellent with the use of either hypertonic saline (3%) or normal saline (0.9%) as a preload for the parturient who received spinal anesthesia before cesarean section. | ||||
Keywords | ||||
blood pressure; Diastolic Blood Pressure; Gestational age; Systolic blood pressure | ||||
Statistics Article View: 206 PDF Download: 438 |
||||