Crystalloid coloading vs. colloid coloading in elective Caesarean section: postspinal hypotension and vasopressor consumption, a prospective, observational clinical trial
Maternal hypotension is a common side effect of spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section. The combination of colloid coloading and vasopressors was considered our standard for its prevention and treatment. As the safety of hydroxyethyl starch is under debate, we replaced colloid with crystalloid coloading.
We hypothesize that the mean blood pressure drop is greater when coloading with crystalloids.
Prospective, observational clinical trial.
Two-centre study conducted in Berlin, Germany.
Parturients scheduled for a Caesarean section were screened for eligibility.
The study protocol and patient monitoring were based on the standard operating procedure for Caesarean section in both centres. The data from the crystalloid group were prospectively collected between November 2014 and July 2015.
Main outcome measures
The primary endpoint was the median drop in mean blood pressure after induction of spinal anaesthesia. Secondary endpoints were incidence of hypotension (drop > 20% of baseline systolic pressure /drop < 100 mmHg), vasopressor and additional fluid requirements (mL), incidence of bradycardia (heart rate < 60 beats per minute), blood loss, Apgar score, and umbilical artery pH. In case of hypotension, patients received phenylephrine or cafedrine/theodrenaline according to their heart rate. A p < 0.05 was considered significant.
345 prospectively enrolled patients (n = 193 crystalloid group vs. n = 152 colloid group) were analysed. The median drop in mean blood pressure was greater in the crystalloid group [34 mmHg (25; 42 mmHg) vs. 21 mmHg (13; 29 mmHg), p < 0.001]. Incidences of hypotension [93.3% vs. 83.6%, p: 0.004] and bradycardia [19.7% vs. 9.9%, p: 0.012] were also significantly greater in the crystalloid group. Vasopressor requirements, blood loss and neonatal outcome were not different between the groups.
Crystalloid coloading was associated with a greater drop in mean blood pressure and a higher incidence of hypotension when compared with colloid coloading. Neonatal outcome was, however, unaffected by the type of fluid.
KeywordsCaesarean section Spinal anaesthesia Hypotension Coloading Crystalloids Colloids
The Editors would like to acknowledge the help of Geoffrey Reading and Andreas Bietenbeck who have given their expertise and time in reviewing the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
- 3.Ripollés Melchor J, Espinosa, Martínez Hurtado E, Casans Francés R, Navarro Pérez R, Abad Gurumeta A, Calvo Vecino JM. Colloids versus crystalloids in the prevention of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia in elective cesarean section. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Miner Anestesiol. 2015;81:1019–30.Google Scholar
- 4.Kinsella SM, Carvalho B, Dyer RA, Fernando R, Mcdonnell N, Mercier FJ, Palanisamy A, Sia ATH, Van de Velde M, Vercueil A, Consensus Statement Collaborators. International consensus statement on the management of hypotension with vasopressors during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2018;73(1):71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Cyna AM, Andrew M, Emmett RS, Middleton P, Simmons SW. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;4(4):CD002251.Google Scholar
- 11.Gogarten W. Spinal anaesthesia for obstetrics. Vol. 17, best practice and research. Clin Anaesthesiol. 2003. 2013:377–92.Google Scholar
- 16.Professional H. Hydroxyethyl starch solutions: FDA safety communication—boxed warning on increased mortality and severe renal injury and risk of bleeding. 2013.Google Scholar
- 17.European Medicines Agency. Hydroxyethyl-starch solutions (HES) should no longer be used in patients with sepsis or burn injuries or in critically ill patients—CMDh endorses PRAC recommendations HES will be available in restricted patient populations. Ema/640658/2013. 2013;44(October):1–3.Google Scholar
- 18.Mercier FJ, Diemunsch P, Ducloy-Bouthors AS, Mignon A, Fischler M, Malinovsky JM, Bolandard F, Aya AG, Raucoules-Aimé M, Chassard D, Keita H, Rigouzzo A, Le Gouez A; CAESAR Working Group. 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. 2014;113(3):459–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Kaufner L, Heimann S, Zander D, Weizsäcker K, Correns I, Sander M, Spies C, Schuster M, Feldheiser A, Henkelmann A, Wernecke KD, VON Heymann C. Neuraxial anesthesia for pain control after cesarean section: a prospective randomized trial comparing three different neuraxial techniques in clinical practice. Miner Anestesiol. 2016;82(5):514–24.Google Scholar
- 22.Arora P, Singh RM, Kundra S, Gautam PL. Fluid administration before caesarean delivery: does type and timing matter? J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(6):UC01–4.Google Scholar
- 23.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 (Sarajevo Bosnia Herzegovina). 2014;68(4):279–81.Google Scholar
- 29.Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS, Ng FF, Lee BB. Prophylactic phenylephrine infusion for preventing hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg 2004;815–21.Google Scholar
- 31.Ngan Kee WD, Tam YH, Khaw KS, Ng FF, Lee SWY. Closed-loop feedback computer-controlled phenylephrine for maintenance of blood pressure during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized trial comparing automated boluses versus infusion. Anesth Analg. 2017;125(1):117–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Bein B, Christ T, Eberhart LHJ. Cafedrine/theodrenaline (20:1) is an established alternative for the management of arterial hypotension in Germany—a review based on a systematic literature search. Front Pharmacol. 2017;8(FEB):1–8.Google Scholar
- 34.Gogarten W, Aken H, Van Kessler P, Wulf H. Durchführung von Analgesie-und Anästhesieverfahren in der Geburtshilfe. Anästh Intensivmed. 2009;50:183–90.Google Scholar
- 35.Clemens KE, Quednau I, Heller AR, Klaschik E. Impact of cafedrine/theodrenaline (Akrinor(R)) on therapy of maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for Cesarean delivery: a retrospective study. Miner Ginecol. 2010;62(6):515–24.Google Scholar
- 38.Kyokong O, Charuluxananan S, Sriprajittichai P, Poomseetong T, Naksin P. The incidence and risk factors of hypotension and bradycardia associated with spinal anesthesia. J Med Assoc Thai. 2006;89:Suppl 3.Google Scholar
- 39.Somboonviboon W, Kyokong O, Charuluxananan S, Narasethakamol A. Incidence and risk factors of hypotension and bradycardia after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91(2):181–7.Google Scholar