Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Height-based dosing algorithm of bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for decreasing maternal hypotension in caesarean section without prophylactic fluid preloading and vasopressors: study protocol for a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
  1. Bowan Huang1,
  2. Qiang Huang2,
  3. Chao Hai2,
  4. Zihao Zheng2,
  5. Yali Li2,
  6. Zhongjun Zhang2
  1. 1 Department of Anesthesiology, Central People’s Hospital of Zhanjiang, Zhanjiang, China
  2. 2 Department of Anesthesiology, ShenZhen People’s Hospital, 2nd Clinical Medical College of Jinan University, Shenzhen, China
  1. Correspondence to Dr Zhongjun Zhang; Luckydoczhang{at}163.com

Abstract

Introduction Effectively preventing or treating spinal-induced maternal hypotension is considered to be the Holy Grail of obstetric anaesthesia. Prophylactic fluid preloading and vasopressors decrease hypotension but may aggravate heart load, induce fetal acidosis or maternal bradycardia. Using low-dose local anaesthetic decreases hypotension but may cause insufficient anaesthesia. Whether there is a height-based dosing algorithm of local anaesthetic in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section that can provide sufficient anaesthesia with less hypotension without prophylactic fluid preloading and vasopressors is unclear. This study was designed to investigate a height-based dosing algorithm of bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

Methods and analysis This single-centre, double-blinded, prospective, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial will include 264 parturients (between 18 and 45 years of age) who are scheduled for caesarean section. All participants will not receive prophylactic fluid preloading. The participants will be randomly divided into two groups: the test group or conventional group. For parturients in the test group, 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine (1.15–1.70 mL) will be injected into the subarachnoid space without prophylactic vasopressors. The bupivacaine dose depends on the height of subjects. For parturients in the conventional group, 0.5% bupivacaine (1.8 mL) will be injected into the subarachnoid space along with prophylactic vasopressors. The primary outcome is the incidence of maternal hypotension. The secondary outcomes include the failure rate of spinal anaesthesia, level of sensory block, degree of motor block, other complications in parturients, time of operation, neonatal outcome and quality of anaesthesia.

Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shenzhen People’s Hospital of Jinan University (Permit No. SZY-00251, chairperson Xiaofang Yu) on 8 February 2018The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, professional societies and meetings.

Trial registration number NCT03497364; Pre-results.

  • cesarean section
  • spinal anesthesia
  • hypotension
  • prophylactic fluid pre-loading
  • prophylactic vasopressors
  • bupivacaine

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors ZZ and BH conceived and designed the experiments. BH, QH, CH and ZZ performed the experiments. QH and YL analysed the data. CH contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools. BH wrote the paper.

  • Funding This work was supported by grants from the Doctoral Innovation Program of Health and Family Planning Commission of Shenzhen Municipality of China (SZBC2017016) to BH.

  • Disclaimer The sponsors have no role in the study design and conduct; the collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; or the preparation and approval of the manuscript.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shenzhen People’s Hospital of Jinan University (Permit No. SZY-00251, chairperson Xiaofang Yu) on 8 February 2018.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.