Choice of anesthesia technique for emergent cesarean sections during COVID-19 era in a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the change of anesthesia management for emergent cesarean sections in our tertiary care hospital in the first year of pandemic. We searched primarily for the changes in spinal to general anesthesia rate and secondarily for presented adult and neonatal intensive care needs in comparison to the year before the pandemic. We also presented the postoperative PCR tests of the emergent cesarean sections as a tertiary outcome. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data such as anesthetic technique, need for postoperative intensive care, duration of hospital stays, postoperative PCR result, and newborn status. RESULTS: The rate of spinal anesthesia changed remarkably from 44.1% to 72.1% after the pandemic (p=0.001). The comparison of the median duration of hospital stays of the pre-pandemic group and post-pandemic group was found significantly longer than that of the before COVID-19 group (p=0.001). The rate of need for postoperative intensive care in the after COVID-19 group was higher (p=0.058). The rate of postoperative intensive care of the newborns in the after COVID-19 group was significantly higher than that of the before COVID-19 group (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: The spinal anesthesia rate for emergent cesarean sections increased significantly during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in tertiary care hospitals. Total health care services after the pandemic were enhanced as seen with elevated numbers of hospital stays, postoperative need of adult and neonatal intensive care.

Evaluation of 254 cesarean sections with COVID-19 in terms of anesthesia and clinical course: 1-year experience.

PURPOSE: The study aims to compare anesthesia methods, clinical course, and maternal and fetal outcomes of symptomatic and asymptomatic pregnant women undergoing cesarean operation with confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: 254 pregnant women with COVID-19 who had a cesarean section in our hospital between March 2020 and March 2021 were included in the study. Demographic information, laboratory test results, radiological data, treatments, anesthesia methods, and prognoses of the patients were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: On admission, 160 (63%) patients were asymptomatic (Group A), and 94 (37%) patients were symptomatic (Group S). The ratio of patients who needed oxygen therapy in the obstetric ward (p < 0.001) and intraoperative period (p < 0.001) and ICU admission (p = 0.005) was higher in Group S. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), ferritin, procalcitonin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels were higher in Group S. In both groups, spinal anesthesia was performed predominantly. The rate of general anesthesia was significantly higher in Group S (16.0% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.003). No difference was found in the amount of sedatives during the spinal anesthesia. CONCLUSION: Close follow-up of the laboratory values and comorbidities (especially asthma) of pregnant will provide information about the clinical course as in other patient groups. Spinal anesthesia is a safe and sufficient anesthesia method in both symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 pregnant women when performed by experienced hands.

Pain distraction during awake low anterior resection and Cuddle Delivery initiative for inpatient: frugal procedural options to support surgery in the COVID-19 era.

OBJECTIVE: Since minimally invasive surgery and general anesthesia are both aerosol-generating procedures, their use became controversial during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Moreover, social distancing resulted in serious psychological consequences for inpatients. This case report investigates pain distraction during awake laparotomy, as well as new possibilities for emotional postoperative support to inpatients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 72-year-old man affected by middle rectal adenocarcinoma underwent lower anterior resection plus total mesorectal excision under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. A 3D mobile theatre (3DMT) was intraoperatively used for pain distraction. A postoperative "Cuddle delivery" service was instituted: video-messages from relatives and close friends were delivered daily to the patient through the 3DMT. Emotional correlations were investigated through a clinical interview by the psychologist of our Hospital. RESULTS: Intraoperative, as well as postoperative pain, resulted well-controlled: visual analogue scale (VAS) ≤3. Conversion to general anesthesia and postoperative intensive support/monitoring were unnecessary. The "Cuddle delivery" initiative positively fed our patient's mood and attitude, strengthening his bond to life. CONCLUSIONS: During pandemic, awake laparotomy under loco-regional anesthesia may be a crucial option in delivering acute care surgery to selected patients when intensive care beds are unavailable. Our procedure introduces potential ways to optimize this approach.

What obstetricians should know about obstetric anesthesia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted obstetric anesthesiologists to reconsider the ways in which basic anesthesia care is provided on the Labor and Delivery Unit. Suggested modifications include an added emphasis on avoiding general anesthesia, a strong encouragement to infected individuals to opt for early neuraxial analgesia, and the prevention of emergent cesarean delivery, whenever possible. Through team efforts, adopting these measures can have real effects on reducing the transmission of the viral illness and maintaining patient and caregiver safety in the labor room.

Anaesthetic Management of Patients with COVID-19: A Single Center Initial Experience from Nepal.

Anaesthetic management of patients with Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) posses multiple challenges. In the low-income nation like Nepal, factors like suboptimal infrastructure and resource limitations may add on to the existing challenges. Proper planning and preparedness can help to overcome the challenges and enhance safety of both the patients undergoing surgery and of the health care workers involved in patient management. Keywords: Anaesthetic management; COVID-19; Nepal.

Implications of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) for the anesthesiological practice. / Implicaciones del COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) para la práctica anestesiológica.

The purpose of this article is to review the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, the clinical-epidemiological aspects of COVID-19, and the implications anesthesiologists when performing aerosol-generating procedures. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SciELO, and Web of Science databases was performed until April 9, 2020, using the words: "COVID-19 or COVID19 or SARS-CoV-2 and anesthesiology or anesthesia". Forty-eight articles with information on the management of the patient in the perioperative period or the intensive care unit when suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. In general, the postponement of elective surgeries for no more than 6 to 8 weeks, depending on the clinical condition of the patients is recommended. In the case of urgent or emergency surgeries, we review the use of personal protection gear, as well as the recommended strategies for carrying out the procedure.

El objetivo de este artículo es revisar las características del SARS-CoV-2, los aspectos clínico-epidemiológicos de COVID-19 y las implicaciones que tienen para los anestesiólogos al realizar procedimientos generadores de aerosoles. Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, Scopus, SciELO y Web of Science hasta el 9 de abril de 2020, utilizando las palabras: “COVID-19 or COVID19 or SARS-CoV-2 and anesthesiology or anesthesia”. Se incluyeron 48 artículos con información sobre el manejo del paciente en el perioperatorio o en la unidad de cuidados intensivos ante la sospecha o confirmación de infección por SARS-CoV-2. En general, se recomienda el aplazamiento de las cirugías electivas por no más de seis a ocho semanas, de acuerdo a las condiciones clínicas de los pacientes. En el caso de cirugías de urgencia o emergencia, se revisan tópicos del sistema de protección personal así como las estrategias recomendadas para la realización de los procedimientos.

Successful Anesthetic Management in Cesarean Section for Pregnant Woman with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND The current COVID-19 pandemic highlights the importance of the mindful use of financial and human resources. Preventing infections and preserving resources and manpower are crucial in healthcare. It is important to ensure the ability of surgeons and specialized interventionalists to function through the pandemic. Until now, no justified protocol has been reported for the anesthetic management in cesarean section (CS). CASE REPORT A 29-year-old pregnant woman, G2P1 at 37+4 weeks of gestation, was referred to our center on March 28, 2020, after she had tested positive for COVID-19. She was stable and the CS was planned after she reached term. Through spinal anesthesia, CS was conducted. The anesthesia team was protected with full personal protection equipment. The operation was carried out smoothly without complication. A female neonate was delivered and was tested to be negative for COVID-19. No medical staff cross-infection was reported. CONCLUSIONS Special precautions should be considered when pregnant women are undergoing CS. Spinal anesthesia is preferred over general anesthesia.

Spinal anaesthesia for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and possible transmission rates in anaesthetists: retrospective, single-centre, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The safety of performing spinal anaesthesia for both patients and anaesthetists alike in the presence of active infection with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Here, we report the clinical characteristics and outcomes for both patients with COVID-19 and the anaesthetists who provided their spinal anaesthesia. METHODS: Forty-nine patients with radiologically confirmed COVID-19 for Caesarean section or lower-limb surgery undergoing spinal anaesthesia in Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan, China participated in this retrospective study. Clinical characteristics and perioperative outcomes were recorded. For anaesthesiologists exposed to patients with COVID-19 by providing spinal anaesthesia, the level of personal protective equipment (PPE) used, clinical outcomes (pulmonary CT scans), and confirmed COVID-19 transmission rates (polymerase chain reaction [PCR]) were reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with COVID-19 requiring supplementary oxygen before surgery had spinal anaesthesia (ropivacaine 0.75%), chiefly for Caesarean section (45/49 [91%]). Spinal anaesthesia was not associated with cardiorespiratory compromise intraoperatively. No patients subsequently developed severe pneumonia. Of 44 anaesthetists, 37 (84.1%) provided spinal anaesthesia using Level 3 PPE. Coronavirus disease 2019 infection was subsequently confirmed by PCR in 5/44 (11.4%) anaesthetists. One (2.7%) of 37 anaesthetists who wore Level 3 PPE developed PCR-confirmed COVID-19 compared with 4/7 (57.1%) anaesthetists who had Level 1 protection in the operating theatre (relative risk reduction: 95.3% [95% confidence intervals: 63.7-99.4]; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anaesthesia was delivered safely in patients with active COVID-19 infection, the majority of whom had Caesarean sections. Level 3 PPE appears to reduce the risk of transmission to anaesthetists who are exposed to mildly symptomatic surgical patients.