Fluid loading therapy to prevent spinal hypotension in women undergoing elective caesarean section: Network meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis and meta-regression

Koen Rijs, Frédéric J Mercier, D Nuala Lucas, Rolf Rossaint, Markus Klimek, Michael Heesen, Koen Rijs, Frédéric J Mercier, D Nuala Lucas, Rolf Rossaint, Markus Klimek, Michael Heesen

Abstract

Background: Fluid loading is one of the recognised measures to prevent hypotension due to spinal anaesthesia in women scheduled for a caesarean section.

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the current evidence on fluid loading in the prevention of spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension.

Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis and meta-regression.

Data sources: Medline, Epub, Embase.com (Embase and Medline), Cochrane Central, Web of Science and Google Scholar were used.

Eligibility criteria: Only randomised controlled trials were used. Patients included women undergoing elective caesarean section who received either crystalloid or colloid fluid therapy as a preload or coload. The comparator was a combination of either a different fluid or time of infusion.

Results: A total of 49 studies (4317 patients) were included. Network meta-analysis concluded that colloid coload and preload offered the highest chance of success (97 and 67%, respectively). Conventional meta-analysis showed that crystalloid preload is associated with a significantly higher incidence of maternal hypotension than colloid preload: risk ratio 1.48 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.69, P < 0.0001, I = 60%). However, this result was not supported by Trial Sequential Analysis. There was a significant dose-response effect for crystalloid volume preload (regression coefficient = -0.073), which was not present in the analysis of only double-blind studies. There was no dose-response effect for the other fluid regimes.

Conclusion: Unlike previous meta-analysies, we found a lack of data obviating an evidence-based recommendation. In most studies, vasopressors were not given prophylactically as is recommended. Studies on the best fluid regimen in combination with prophylactic vasopressors are needed. Due to official european usage restrictions on the most studied colloid (HES), we recommend crystalloid coload as the most appropriate fluid regimen.

Trial registration: CRD42018099347.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of the literature search.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Risk of bias summary.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Conventional meta-analysis of the primary outcome.
Fig. 3 (Continued)
Fig. 3 (Continued)
Conventional meta-analysis of the primary outcome.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Network meta-analysis.
Fig. 4 (Continued)
Fig. 4 (Continued)
Network meta-analysis.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Funnel plot.

References

    1. Mercier FJ, Auge M, Hoffmann C, et al. Maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for caesarean delivery. Minerva Anestesiol 2013; 79:62–73.
    1. Langesaeter E, Rosseland LA, Stubhaug A. Continuous invasive blood pressure and cardiac output monitoring during cesarean delivery: a randomized, double-blind comparison of low-dose versus high-dose spinal anesthesia with intravenous phenylephrine or placebo infusion. Anesthesiology 2008; 109:856–863.
    1. Ngan Kee WD. The use of vasopressors during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2017; 30:319–325.
    1. Veeser M, Hofmann T, Roth R, et al. Vasopressors for the management of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for elective caesarean section. Systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2012; 56:810–816.
    1. Heesen M, Stewart A, Fernando R. Vasopressors for the treatment of maternal hypotension following spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section: past, present and future. Anaesthesia 2015; 70:252–257.
    1. Kinsella SM, Carvalho B, Dyer RA, et al. International consensus statement on the management of hypotension with vasopressors during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2018; 73:71–92.
    1. Doherty A, Ohashi Y, Downey K, Carvalho JC. Phenylephrine infusion versus bolus regimens during cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: a double-blind randomized clinical trial to assess hemodynamic changes. Anesth Analg 2012; 115:1343–1350.
    1. Ngan Kee WD, Lee SW, Ng FF, et al. Randomized double-blinded comparison of norepinephrine and phenylephrine for maintenance of blood pressure during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology 2015; 122:736–745.
    1. Ngan Kee WD, Tam YH, Khaw KS, et al. 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; 125:117–123.
    1. Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS, Ng FF. Prevention of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: an effective technique using combination phenylephrine infusion and crystalloid cohydration. Anesthesiology 2005; 103:744–750.
    1. Mercier FJ, Diemunsch P, Ducloy-Bouthors AS, et al. 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; 113:459–467.
    1. Staikou C, Paraskeva A, Karmaniolou I, et al. Current practice in obstetric anesthesia: a 2012 European survey. Minerva Anestesiol 2014; 80:347–354.
    1. Singh PM, Singh NP, Reschke M, et al. Vasopressor drugs for the prevention and treatment of hypotension during neuraxial anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of fetal and maternal outcomes. Br J Anaesth 2020; 124:e95–e107.
    1. Fitzgerald JP, Fedoruk KA, Jadin SM, et al. Prevention of hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Anaesthesia 2020; 75:109–121.
    1. Brok J, Thorlund K, Wetterslev J, Gluud C. Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive: trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses. Int J Epidemiol 2009; 38:287–298.
    1. Imberger G, Thorlund K, Gluud C, Wetterslev J. False-positive findings in Cochrane meta-analyses with and without application of trial sequential analysis: an empirical review. BMJ Open 2016; 6:e011890.
    1. Wetterslev J, Thorlund K, Brok J, Gluud C. Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61:64–75.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62:1006–1012.
    1. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011; 343:d5928.
    1. Salanti G, Del Giovane C, Chaimani A, et al. Evaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014; 9:e99682.
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21:1539–1558.
    1. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2004; 23:3105–3124.
    1. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 2005; 331:897–900.
    1. Rucker G. Network meta-analysis, electrical networks and graph theory. Res Synth Methods 2012; 3:312–324.
    1. Higgins JP, Jackson D, Barrett JK, et al. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multiarm studies. Res Synth Methods 2012; 3:98–110.
    1. Rucker G, Schwarzer G. Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods. BMC Med Res Methodol 2015; 15:58.
    1. Heesen M, Klimek M, Imberger G, et al. Co-administration of dexamethasone with peripheral nerve block: intravenous vs perineural application: systematic review, meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial-sequential analysis. Br J Anaesth 2018; 120:212–227.
    1. Imberger G, Gluud C, Boylan J, Wetterslev J. Systematic reviews of anesthesiologic interventions reported as statistically significant: problems with power, precision, and type 1 error protection. Anesth Analg 2015; 121:1611–1622.
    1. Thorlund K, Devereaux PJ, Wetterslev J, et al. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses? Int J Epidemiol 2009; 38:276–286.
    1. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997; 315:629–634.
    1. Alimian M, Mohseni M, Safaeian R, et al. Comparison of hydroxyethyl starch 6% and crystalloids for preloading in elective caesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Med Arch 2014; 68:279–281.
    1. Arora P, Singh RM, Kundra S, Gautam PL. Fluid administration before caesarean delivery: does type and timing matter? J Clin Diagn Res 2015; 9:UC01–UC04.
    1. Bennasr L, Ben Marzouk S, Ajili Z, et al. Prevention of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective caesarean section: coloading with HAE 130/0.4 vs normal saline solution. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2014; 33:643–647.
    1. Bottiger BA, Bezinover DS, Mets B, et al. Phenylephrine infusion for spinal-induced hypotension in elective cesarean delivery: does preload make a difference? J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2016; 32:319–324.
    1. Bouchnak M, Magouri M, Abassi S, et al. Preloading with HES 130/0.4 versus normal saline solution to prevent hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2012; 31:523–527.
    1. Cardoso MM, Bliacheriene S, Freitas CR, et al. Preload during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: comparison between crystalloid and colloid solutions. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2004; 54:781–787.
    1. Carvalho B, Mercier FJ, Riley ET, et al. Hetastarch coloading is as effective as preloading for the prevention of hypotension following spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth 2009; 18:150–155.
    1. Chumnanvej S, Sakuljane S. Comparative study of various fluid loading methods for elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia in phramongkutklao hospital: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Med Assoc Thailand 2018; 101:1605–1609.
    1. Dahlgren G, Granath F, Pregner K, et al. Colloid vs. crystalloid preloading to prevent maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49:1200–1206.
    1. Dahlgren G, Granath F, Wessel H, Irestedt L. Prediction of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for Cesarean section and its relation to the effect of crystalloid or colloid preload. Int J Obstet Anesth 2007; 16:128–134.
    1. Dyer RA, Farina Z, Joubert IA, et al. Crystalloid preload versus rapid crystalloid administration after induction of spinal anaesthesia (coload) for elective caesarean section. Anaesth Intensive Care 2004; 32:351–357.
    1. Ewaldsson CA, Hahn RG. Bolus injection of Ringer's solution and dextran 1 kDa during induction of spinal anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49:152–159.
    1. Farid Z, Mushtaq R, Ashraf S, Zaeem K. Comparative efficacy of crystalloid preloading and coloading to prevent spinal anesthesia induced hypotension in elective caesarean section. Pakistan J Med Health Sci 2016; 10:42–45.
    1. French GW, White JB, Howell SJ, Popat M. Comparison of pentastarch and Hartmann's solution for volume preloading in spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 1999; 83:475–477.
    1. Golmohammadi M, Mansuri P, Javid M, et al. Comparison of the effects of colloid loading before and after spinal anesthesia to prevent maternal hypotension in cesarean section. J Zanjan Univ Med Sci Health Serv 2013; 21:1–9.
    1. Hasan AB, Mondal MK, Badruddoza NM, et al. Comparison of three fluid regimens for preloading in elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Mymensingh Med J 2012; 21:533–540.
    1. Jacob J, Williams A, Afzal L, Verghese M. Crystalloid preload versus crystalloid coload for parturients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. J Obstet Anaesth Crit Care 2012; 2:10.
    1. Karinen J, Rasanen J, Alahuhta S, et al. Effect of crystalloid and colloid preloading on uteroplacental and maternal haemodynamic state during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 1995; 75:531–535.
    1. Kaya S, Karaman H, Erdogan H, et al. Combined use of low-dose bupivacaine, colloid preload and wrapping of the legs for preventing hypotension in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. J Int Med Res 2007; 35:615–625.
    1. Khan M, Nisai W, Farooqi A, et al. Crystalloid coload: a better option than crystalloid pre-load for prevention of postspinal hypotension in elective caesarean section. Internet J Anesthesiol 2013; 32:1–8.
    1. Ko JS, Kim CS, Cho HS, Choi DH. A randomized trial of crystalloid versus colloid solution for prevention of hypotension during spinal or low-dose combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth 2007; 16:8–12.
    1. Lin CS, Lin TY, Huang CH, et al. Prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: dextran 40 versus lactated Ringer's solution. Acta Anaesthesiol Sin 1999; 37:55–59.
    1. Madi-Jebara S, Ghosn A, Sleilaty G, et al. Prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (Voluven) versus lactated Ringer's solution. J Med Liban 2008; 56:203–207.
    1. Matsota P, Karakosta A, Pandazi A, et al. The effect of 0.5 l 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus 1 l Ringer's lactate preload on the hemodynamic status of parturients undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery using arterial pulse contour analysis. J Anesth 2015; 29:352–359.
    1. McDonald S, Fernando R, Ashpole K, Columb M. Maternal cardiac output changes after crystalloid or colloid coload following spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg 2011; 113:803–810.
    1. Mitra T, Das A, Majumdar S, et al. Prevention of altered hemodynamics after spinal anesthesia: a comparison of volume preloading with tetrastarch, succinylated gelatin and ringer lactate solution for the patients undergoing lower segment caesarean section. Saudi J Anaesth 2014; 8:456–462.
    1. Nishikawa K, Yokoyama N, Saito S, Goto F. Comparison of effects of rapid colloid loading before and after spinal anesthesia on maternal hemodynamics and neonatal outcomes in cesarean section. J Clin Monit Comput 2007; 21:125–129.
    1. Oh AY, Hwang JW, Song IA, et al. Influence of the timing of administration of crystalloid on maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: preload versus coload. BMC Anesthesiol 2014; 14:36.
    1. Razavi M, Peivandi Yazdi A, Zirak N, et al. Comparison between colloid and crystalloid infusions in the prevention of postspinal hypotension in cesarean deliveries. Perinatology 2019; 19:7–13.
    1. Romdhani C, Trabelsi W, Lebbi A, et al. Lower incidence of hypotension following spinal anesthesia with 6% hydroxyethyl starch preload compared to 9 per thousand saline solution in caesarean delivery. Tunis Med 2014; 92:406–410.
    1. Rupnar V, Fernandes S. A prospective randomised study comparing crystalloid preload and coload in parturients for caesarean section under subarachnoid block. J Med Sci Clin Res 2018; 6:445–452.
    1. Saghafinia M, Jalali A, Eskandari M, et al. The effects of hydroxyethyl starch 6% and crystalloid on volume preloading changes following spinal anesthesia. Adv Biomed Res 2017; 6:115.
    1. Saleem H, Butt TA, Akhtar N. Efficacy of crystalloids and colloids as preloading fluids to prevent hypotension in spinal aAnesthesia in elective C-sections. P J M H S 2016; 10:1177–1181.
    1. Shah S, Iqbal A, Naqvi S. Comparison of crystalloid preloading and crystalloid coloading for prevention of spinal anesthesia induced hypotension. Pak Armed Forces Med 2015; 65:s231–235.
    1. Sharma SK, Gajraj NM, Sidawi JE. Prevention of hypotension during spinal anesthesia: a comparison of intravascular administration of hetastarch versus lactated Ringer's solution. Anesth Analg 1997; 84:111–114.
    1. Siddik SM, Aouad MT, Kai GE, et al. Hydroxyethylstarch 10% is superior to Ringer's solution for preloading before spinal anesthesia for Cesarean section. Can J Anaesth 2000; 47:616–621.
    1. Siddik-Sayyid SM, Nasr VG, Taha SK, et al. A randomized trial comparing colloid preload to coload during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1219–1224.
    1. Singh U, Saha U. Prevention of hypotension following spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: comparison of volume preloading with ringer lactate & 6% hydroxyethyl starch (hes 130/0.4). J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2009; 25:54–58.
    1. Tamilselvan P, Fernando R, Bray J, et al. The effects of crystalloid and colloid preload on cardiac output in the parturient undergoing planned cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: a randomized trial. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1916–1921.
    1. Tawfik MM, Hayes SM, Jacoub FY, et al. Comparison between colloid preload and crystalloid coload in cesarean section under spinal anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Obstet Anesth 2014; 23:317–323.
    1. Teoh WH, Sia AT. Colloid preload versus coload for spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: the effects on maternal cardiac output. Anesth Analg 2009; 108:1592–1598.
    1. Ueyama H, He YL, Tanigami H, et al. Effects of crystalloid and colloid preload on blood volume in the parturient undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective Cesarean section. Anesthesiology 1999; 91:1571–1576.
    1. Unlugenc H, Turktan M, Evruke IC, et al. Rapid fluid administration and the incidence of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia and ephedrine requirement: the effect of crystalloid versus colloid coloading. Middle East J Anaesthesiol 2015; 23:273–281.
    1. Upadya M, Bhat S, Paul S. Six percentage hetastarch versus lactated Ringer's solution: for preloading before spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. Anesth Essays Res 2016; 10:33–37.
    1. Varshney R, Jain G. Comparison of colloid preload versus coload under low dose spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesth Essays Res 2013; 7:376–380.
    1. Wani S, Pandit B, Din M, et al. Comparative study to evaluate the effect of colloid coloading versus crystalloid coloading for prevention of spinal anaesthesia induced hypotension and effect on fetal Apgar score in patients undergoing elective lower segment caesarean section: a prospective observational study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2018; 7:1868–1875.
    1. Yalçinkaya A, Sivrikaya GU, Erol MK, Hanci A. Comparison of the effectiveness of volum preloading with crystalloid and colloid solutions in caesarean section operations under spinal anaesthesia. Anestezi Dergisi 2010; 18:36–42.
    1. Yorozu T, Morisaki H, Kondoh M, et al. Comparative effect of 6% hydroxyethyl starch (containing 1% dextrose) and lactated Ringer's solution for cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. J Anesth 2002; 16:203–206.
    1. Banerjee A, Stocche RM, Angle P, Halpern SH. Preload or coload for spinal anesthesia for elective Cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth 2010; 57:24–31.
    1. Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019). Cochrane 2019; Available from .
    1. Chooi C, Cox JJ, Lumb RS, et al. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 8:CD002251.
    1. Ripolles Melchor J, Espinosa A, Martinez Hurtado E, et al. Colloids versus crystalloids in the prevention of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia in elective cesarean section. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Anestesiol 2015; 81:1019–1030.
    1. Li L, Zhang Y, Tan Y, Xu S. Colloid or crystalloid solution on maternal and neonatal hemodynamics for cesarean section: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2013; 39:932–941.
    1. Kleiman AM, Chisholm CA, Dixon AJ, et al. Evaluation of the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol implementation on maternal outcomes following elective cesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth 2020; 43:39–46.
    1. Pan J, Hei Z, Li L, et al. The advantage of implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in acute pain management during elective cesarean delivery: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2020; 16:369–378.
    1. Ituk U, Habib AS. Enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery. F1000Res 2018; 7:
    1. Bijker JB, van Klei WA, Kappen TH, et al. Incidence of intraoperative hypotension as a function of the chosen definition: literature definitions applied to a retrospective cohort using automated data collection. Anesthesiology 2007; 107:213–220.
    1. Heesen M, Kolhr S, Rossaint R, Straube S. Prophylactic phenylephrine for caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia 2014; 69:143–165.
    1. EMA. Hydroxyethyl starch solutions: CMDh introduces new measures to protect patients. EMA 2018; 498908:
    1. Charlesworth M, Shelton CL. Should intravenous gelatins have a role in contemporary peri-operative and critical care? Anaesthesia 2020; 75:266–269.
    1. Zieleskiewicz L, Leone M. Re: Lung and cardiac ultrasound for hemodynamic monitoring of patients with severe preeclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49:22.
    1. Pretorius T, van Rensburg G, Dyer RA, Biccard BM. The influence of fluid management on outcomes in preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obstet Anesth 2018; 34:85–95.
    1. Arzola C, Wieczorek PM. Efficacy of low-dose bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2011; 107:308–318.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir