, Volume 64, Issue 3, pp 223–236

Regional Anaesthesia in Pre-eclampsia

Advantages and Disadvantages
Current Opinion


Pre-eclampsia is a multisystemic disorder that is characterised by endothelial cell dysfunction as a consequence of abnormal genetic and immunological mechanisms. Despite active research for years, the exact aetiology of this potentially fatal disorder remains unknown. Although understanding of the pathophysiology of pre-eclampsia has improved, management has not changed significantly over the years. Anaesthetic management of these patients remains a challenge. Although general anaesthesia can be used safely in pre-eclamptic women, it is fraught with greater maternal morbidity and mortality. Currently, the safety of regional anaesthesia techniques is well established and they can provide better obstetrical outcome when chosen properly. Thus, regional anaesthesia is extensively used for the management of pain and labour in women with pre-eclampsia. This article highlights the advantages and disadvantages of regional anaesthetic techniques including epidural, spinal and combined spinal-epidural analgesia, used as a part of the management of pre-eclampsia. The problems associated with general anaesthesia and controversies in relation to obstetric regional anaesthesia are discussed.


  1. 1.
    Mandai NG. Anesthesia and preeclampsia [letter]. JAMA 2002 Oct; 288(15): 1847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schneider MC, Landau R, Mortl MG. New insights in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2001 Jun; 14(3): 291–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Norwitz ER, Hsu CD, Repke JT. Acute complications of preeclampsia. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2002 Jun; 45(2): 308–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haddad T. Update on pre-eclampsia. Int Anesthesiol Clin 2002 Fall; 40(4): 115–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mackay AP, Berg CJ, Atrash H. Pregnancy-related mortality from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2001 Apr; 97(4): 533–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Department of Health. Why mothers die: report on the confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom, 1994–96. London: The Stationery Office (TSO), 1998Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist (RCOG). Why mothers die: 1997–99: the fifth report of the confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom. London: RCOG Press, 2001Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gatt SP. Clinical management of established pre-eclampsia and gestational hypertension: an anaesthetist’s perspective. Baillieres Best Pract Rees Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1999 Mar; 13(1): 95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meis PJ, Goldenberg RL, Mercer BM, et al. The preterm prediction study: risk factors for indicated preterm births: Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998 Mar; 178(3): 562–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, et al. Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979–1990. Anesthesiology 1997 Feb; 86(2): 277–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Swiet M. Maternal mortalty: confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000 Apr; 182(4): 760–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Samsoon GL, Young JRB. Difficult intubation: a retrospective study. Anaesthesia 1987 May; 42(5): 487–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stone DJ, Gal TJ. Airway management. In: Miller RD, editor. Anaesthesia. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1994: 1403–35Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shibli KU, Russell IF. A survey of anaesthetic techniques used for caesarean section in the UK in 1997. Int J Obstet Anesth 2000 Jul; 9(3): 160–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    American Society of Anesthesiologists. Practice guidelines for obstetrical anesthesia: a report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on obstetrical anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1999 Feb; 90(2): 600–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eltzschig HK, Lieberman ES, Camann WR. Regional anesthesia and analegesia for labor and delivery. N Engl J Med 2003 Jan; 348(4): 319–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Writer D. Hypertensive disorders. In: Chestnut DH, editor. Obstetric anaesthesia principles and practice. St Louis (MO): Mosby, 1994: 846–82Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scull TJ, Hemmings GT, Carli F, et al. Epidural analgesia in early labour blocks the stress response but uterine contractions remain unchanged. Can J Anaesth 1998 Jul; 45(7): 626–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abboud T, Artal R, Sarkis F, et al. Sympathoadrenal activity, maternal, fetal, and neonatal responses after epidural anaesthesia in the preeclamptic patient. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982 Dec; 144(8): 915–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kanayama N, Belayet HM, Khatun S, et al. A new treatment of severe pre-eclampsia by long-term epidural anaesthesia. J Hum Hypertens 1999 Mar; 13(3): 167–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shnider SM, Levinson G, Cosmi EV. Obstetric anesthesia and uterine blood flow. In: Shnider SM, Levinson G, editors. Anesthesia for obstetrics. Baltimore (MD): Williams & Wilkins, 1993: 38Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramanathan J, Coleman P, Sibai BM. Anesthetic modification of hemodynamic and neuroendocrine stress responses to cesarean delivery in women with severe preeclampsia. Anesth Analg 1991 Dec; 73(6): 772–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moodley J, Jjuuko G, Rout C. Epidural compared with general anaesthesia for caesarean delivery in conscious women with eclampsia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2001 Apr; 108(4): 378–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gasparoni A, Ciardelli L, De Amici D, et al, editor. Effect of general and epidural anaesthesia on thyroid hormones and immunity in neonates. Paediatr Anaesth 2002 Jan; 12(1): 59–64Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Norris MC, Leighton BL, DeSimone CA. Needle bevel direction and headache after inadvertent durai puncture. Anesthesiology 1989 May; 70(5): 729–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The use of electronic fetal monitoring. London: RCOG, 2001Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brown DL. Spinal, epidural and caudal anaesthesia. In: Miller RD, editor. Anaesthesia. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1994: 1505–33Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Russell R, Groves P, Taub N, et al. Assessing long term backache after childbirth. BMJ 1993 May; 306(6888): 1299–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russell R, Dundas R, Reynolds F. Long term backache after childbirth: prospective search for causative factors. BMJ 1996 Jun; 312(7043): 1384–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Howell CJ, Dean T, Lucking L, et al. Randomised study of long term outcome after epidural versus non-epidural analgesia during labour [published erratum appears in BMJ 2002 Sep; 325(7364): 580]. BMJ 2002 Aug; 325(7360): 357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Beilin Y, Leibowitz AB, Bernstein HH, et al. Controversies of labor epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg 1999 Oct; 89(4): 969–78PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gaiser R. Neonatal effects of labor analgesia. Int Anesthesiol Clin 2002 Fall; 40(4): 49–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hood DD, Curry R. Spinal versus epidural anesthesia for caesarean section in severely preeclamptic patients: a retrospective survey. Anesthesiology 1999 May; 90(5): 1276–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chiu CL, Mansor M, Ng KP, et al. Retrospective review of spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section in preeclamptic patients. Int J Obstet Anesth 2003 Jan; 12(1): 23–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sharwood-Smith G, Clark V, Watson E. Regional anaesthesia for caesarean section in severe preeclampsia: spinal anaesthesia is the preferred choice. Int J Obstet Anesth 1999 Apr; 8(2): 85–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Aya AG, Mangin R, Vialles N, et al. Patients with severe preeclampsia experience less hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean delivery than healthy paturients: a prospective cohort comparison. Anesth Analg 2003 Sep; 97(3): 867–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eisenach JC. Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in obstetrics. Anesthesiology 1999 Jul; 91(1): 299–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Paech MJ, Banks SL, Gurrin LC, et al. A randomised, double-blinded trial of subarachnoid bupivacaine and fentanyl with or without clonidine, for combined spinal/epidural analgesia during labor. Anesth Analg 2002 Nov; 95(5): 1396–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Overdyk FJ, Harvey SC. Continuous spinal anesthesia for cesarean section in a parturient with severe preeclampsia. J Clin Anesth 1998 Sep; 10(6): 510–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Palot M, Visseaux H, Botmans C. Conduction anesthesia and the newborn infant. Cah Anesthesiol 1995; 43(6): 547–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cooper DW, Carpenter M, Mowbray P, et al. Fetal and maternal effects of phenylephrine and ephedrine during spinal anesthesia for caesarean delivery. Anesthesiology 2002 Dec; 97(6): 1582–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bloom SL, McIntire DD, Kelly MA, et al. Lack of effect of walking on labor and delivery. N Engl J Med 1998 Jul; 339(2): 76–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Vallejo MC, Firestone LL, Mandell GL, et al. Effect of epidural analgesia with ambulation on labor duration. Anesthesiology 2001 Oct; 95(4): 857–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Karraz MA. Ambulatory epidural anesthesia and the duration of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003 Feb, 22Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wallace DH, Leveno KJ, Cunningham FG, et al. Randomized comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 1995 Aug; 86(2): 193–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Norris MC, Fogel ST, Conway-Long C. Combined spinalepidural versus epidural labor analgesia. Anesthesiology 2001 Oct; 95(4): 913–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Holmstrom B, Rawal N, Axelsson K, et al. Risk of catheter migration during combined spinal epidural block: percutaneous epiduroscopy study. Anesth Analg 1995 Apr; 80(4): 747–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Herman N, Molin J, Knape KG. No additional metal particle formation using the needle-through-needle combined epidural/ spinal technique. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996 Feb; 40(2): 227–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Macarthur A. Management of controversies in obstetric anesthesia. Can J Anaesth 1999 May; 46 (5 Pt 2): R111–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nickells JS, Vaughan DJ, Lillywhite NK, et al. Speed of onset of regional analgesia in labour: a comparison of the epidural and spinal routes. Anaesthesia 2000 Jan; 55(1): 17–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ramanathan J, Vaddadi AK, Arheart KL. Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia with low doses of intrathecal bupivacaine in women with severe pre-eclampsia: a preliminary report. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001 Jan–Feb; 26(1): 46–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Barton JR, Witlin AG, Sibai BM. Management of mild preeclampsia. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1999 Sep; 42(3): 455–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Beilin Y, Bodian CA, Haddad EM, et al. Practice patterns of anesthesiologists regarding situations in obstetric anesthesia where clinical management is controversial. Anesth Analg 1996 Oct; 83(4): 735–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bromage PR. Neurologic complications of regional anesthesia for obstetrics. In: Shnider SM, Levinson G, editors. Anesthesia for obstetrics. Baltimore (MD): Williams & Wilkins, 1993: 443–4Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Robson S, Howell P. Report of a Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology meeting 1994 on hypertension in pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994 Jul; 101(7): 639–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Beilin Y, Zahn J, Comerford M. Safe epidural analgesia in thirty parturients with platelet counts between 69,000 and 98,000 mm−3. Anesth Analg 1997 Aug; 85(2): 385–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vigil-De Gracia P, Silva S, Montufar C, et al. Anesthesia in pregnant women with HELLP syndrome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001 Jul; 74(1): 23–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rodgers RP, Levin J. A critical reappraisal of the bleeding time. Semin Thromb Hemost 1990 Jan; 16(1): 1–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    The bleeding time [editorial]. Lancet 1991 Jun; 337: 1447–8Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    McDonagh RJ, Ray JG, Burrows RF, et al. Platelet count may predict abnormal bleeding time among pregnant women with hypertension and preeclampsia. Can J Anaesth 2001 Jun; 48(6): 563–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Srinivasa V, Gilbertson LI, Bhavani-Shankar K. Thromboelas-tography: where is it and where is it heading? Int Anesthesiol Clin 2001 Winter; 39(1): 35–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Orlikowski CE, Rocke DA, Murray EB, et al. Thromboelas-tography changes in pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Br J Anaesth 1996 Aug; 77(2): 157–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Whitten CW, Greilich PE. Thromboelastography: past, present, and future. Anesthesiology 2000 May; 92(5): 1226–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Davies J, Fernando R, Hallworth S. Platelet function in preeclampsia: platelet function analyzer (PFA-100) vs TEG [abstract]. Anesthesiology 2001 Apr; 94(1A): AlGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vincelot A, Nathan N, Collet D, et al. Platelet function during pregnancy: an evaluation using the PFA-100 analyser. Br J Anaesth 2001 Dec; 87(6): 890–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Vandermeulen EP, Van Aken H, Vermylen J. Antocoagulants and spinal-epidural anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1994 Dec; 79(6): 1165–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Vandermeulen E. Is anticoagulant and central neural blockade a safe combination? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 1999 Oct; 12(5): 539–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    de Swiet M, Redman CW. Aspirin, extradural anaesthesia and the MRC Collaborative Low-dose Aspirin Study in Pregnancy (CLASP). Br J Anaesth 1992 Jul; 69(1): 109–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    CLASP (Collaborative Low-dose Aspirin Study in Pregnancy) Collaborative Group. CLASP: a randomized trial of low-dose aspirin for the prevention and treatment of pre-eclampsia among 9364 pregnant women. Lancet 1994 Mar; 343: 619–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ellison J, Walker ID, Greer IA. Antenatal use of enoxaparin for prevention and treatment of thromboembolism in pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2000 Sep; 107(9): 1116–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Rodie VA, Thompson AJ, Stewart FM, et al. Low molecular weight heparin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in pregnancy: a case series. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2002 Sep; 109(9): 1020–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Harnett MJ, Datta S, Bhavani-Shankar K. The effect of magnesium on coagulation in parturients with preeclampsia. Anesth Analg 2001 May; 92(5): 1257–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Naulty JS, Smith R, Ross R. Effects of changes in labor analgesic practice on labor outcome [abstract]. Anesthesiology 1988 Sep; 69(3A): A660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Parker RK. Influence of labor epidural management on outcome in obstetrics. Reg Anesth 1992; 17 Suppl.: 31–5Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Loughnan BA, Carli F, Romney M, et al. Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labour. Br J Anaesth 2000 Jun; 84(6): 715–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mandai NG. Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labour. Br J Anaesth 2000 Oct; 85(4): 665–6Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Thorp JA, Hu DH, Albin RM, et al. The effect of intrapartum epidural analgesia on nulliparous labor: a randomized, controlled, prospective trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993 Oct; 169(4): 851–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Newton ER, Schroeder BC, Knape KG, et al. Epidural analgesia and uterine function. Obstet Gynecol 1995 May; 85 (5 Pt 1): 749–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Alexander JM, Lucas MJ, Ramin SM, et al. The course of labor with or without epidural analgesia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998 Mar; 178(3): 516–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Halpern SH, Leighton BL, Ohlsson A, et al. Effect of epidural vs parenteral opioid analgesia on the progress of labor: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1998 Dec; 280(24): 2105–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Chestnut DH. Does epidural analgesia during labor affect the incidence of cesarean delivery? Reg Anesth 1997 Nov–Dec; 22(6): 495–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Hogg B, Hauth JC, Caritis SN, et al. Safety of labor epidural anesthesia for women with severe hypertensive disease. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999 Nov; 181 (5 Pt 1): 1096–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Zhang J, Klebanoff MA, DerSimonian R. Epidural analgesia in association with duration of labor and mode of delivery: a quantitative review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999 Apr; 180(4): 970–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Sharma SK, Alexander JM, Messick G, et al. Cesarean delivery: a randomised trial of epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor in nulliparous women. Anesthesiology 2002 Mar; 96(3): 546–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Head BB, Owen J, Vincent Jr RD, et al. A randomized trial of intrapartum analgesia in women with severe preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2002 Mar; 99(3): 452–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Impey L, MacQuillan K, Robson M. Epidural analgesia need not increase operative delivery rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000 Feb; 182(2): 358–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Bohra U, Donnelly J, O’Connell MP, et al. Active management of labour revisited: first 1000 primiparous labours in 2000. J Obstet Gynaecol 2003 Mar; 23(2): 118–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Luxman D, Wohlman I, Groutz A, et al. The effect of early epidural block administration on the progression and outcome of labor. Int J Obstet Anesth 1998 Jul; 7(3): 161–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Committee on Obstetric Practice. Analgesia and caesarean delivery rates: ACOG Committee opinion number 269, February 2002. Obstet Gynecol 2002 Feb; 99(2): 369–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Halpern SH, Walsh V. Epidural ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for labor: a meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2003 May; 96(5): 1473–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Thallon A, Shennan A. Epidural and spinal analgesia and labour. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2001 Dec; 13(6): 583–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Okutomi T, Amano K, Morishima HO. Effect of standard diluted epinephrine infusion on epidural anesthesia in labor. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2000 Sep–Oct; 25(5): 529–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Okutomi T, Mochizuki J, Amano K, et al. Effect of epidural epinephrine infusion with bupivacaine on labor pain and mother-fetus outcome in humans. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2000 May–Jun; 25(3): 228–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lam DT, Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS. Extension of epidural blockade in labour for emergency caesarean section using 2% lidocaine with epinephrine and fentanyl, with or without alkalinisation. Anaesthesia 2001 Aug; 56(8): 790–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Reynolds F, Sharma SK, Seed PT. Analgesia in labour and fetal acid-base balance: a meta-analysis comparing epidural with systemic opioid analgeisa. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2002 Dec; 109(12): 1344–53Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Marx GF, Luykx WM, Cohen S. Fetal-neonatal status following caesarean section for fetal distress. Br J Anaesth 1984 Sep; 56(9): 1009–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kolatat T, Somboonnanonda A, Lertakyamanee J, et al. Effects of general and regional anesthesia on the neonate (a prospective, randomized trial). J Med Assoc Thai 1999 Jan; 82(1): 40–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Fernando R, Bonello E, Gill P, et al. Neonatal welfare and placental transfer of fentanyl and bupivacaine during ambulatory combined spinal epidural analgesia for labour. Anaesthesia 1997 Jun; 52(6): 517–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Halpern SH, Levine T, Wilson DB, et al. Effect of labor analgesia on breastfeeding success. Birth 1999 Jun; 26(2): 83–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Ortega D, Viviand X, Lorec AM, et al. Excretion of lidocaine and bupivacaine in breast milk following epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1999 Apr; 43(4): 394–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Dick WF. Anaesthesia for caesarean section (epidural and general): effects on the neonate. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995 May; 59 Suppl.: S61–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Robson SC, Pearson JF. Fluid restriction policies in preeclampsia are obsolete. Int J Obstet Anesth 1999 Jan; 8(1): 49–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Sibai BM, Mabie BC, Harvey CJ, et al. Pulmonary edema in severe preeclampsia-eclampsia: analysis of thirty-seven consecutive cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987 May; 156(5): 1174–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Hawthorne L, Slaymaker A, Bamber J, et al. Effect of fluid preload on maternal haemodynamics for low-dose epidural analgesia in labour. Int J Obstet Anesth 2001 Oct; 10(4): 312–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Belfort M, Uys P, Dommisse J, et al. Haemodynamic changes in gestational proteinuric hypertension: the effects of rapid volume expansion and vasodilator therapy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989 Jun; 96(6): 634–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Karinen J, Rasanen J, Alahuhta S, et al. Maternal and uteroplacental haemodynamic state in pre-eclamptic patients during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 1996 May; 76(5): 616–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Frigo MG, Camorcia M, Capogna G, et al. Prehydration and anaesthesia in obstetrics: state of the art. Minerva Anestesiol 2001 Sep; 67 (9 Suppl. 1): 161–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Thorp JA. Epidural analgesia during labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1999 Dec; 42(4): 785–801PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Cotton DB, Lee W, Huhta JC, et al. Hemodynamic profile of severe pregnancy-induced hypertension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988 Mar; 158 (3 Pt 1): 523–9PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© adis data information BV 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnaesthesiaPeterborough Hospitals NHS Trust, Peterborough District HospitalPeterboroughUK

Personalised recommendations