Back

Anaesthesia and infection control in cesarean section of pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Yue, L.; Han, L.; Li, Q.; Zhong, M.; Wang, J.; Wan, Z.; Chu, C.; Zeng, Y.; Peng, M.; Yang, L.; Li, N.

2020-03-27 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.03.23.20040394 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first emerged in Wuhan, China, and soon caused an ongoing pandemic globally. In this study we conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia (CSEA) and infection control measures on perinatal care quality of 30 pregnant women with confirmed and suspected COVID-19. MethodsIndividual demographic data, clinical outcomes, laboratory investigations of pregnant women and their newborns were collected from electronic medical records of the Maternal and Children Health Hospital of Hubei Province, during January 24 to February 29, 2020. Anaesthesia and surgery results were compared between pregnant women with confirmed and suspected COVID-19 infection. ResultsUsing CSEA in cesarean section was effective and safe for pregnant women with confirmed and suspected COVID-19 infection. Administration of dezocine and morphine was effective as postoperative analgesia, and well tolerated in COVID-19 patients. The assessment of surgery outcomes also showed similar results in both confirmed and suspected cases. No respiratory failure nor distress were found in the mothers with confirmed COVID-19 infection and their neonates. None of these patients experienced severe obstetric complications related to anaesthesia and surgeries. No COVID-19 infection was reported in the neonates born to the mothers with confirmed COVID-19 infection and healthcare workers in these operations. ConclusionsIn cesarean section for pregnant women with COVID-19 infection, CSEA was safe and efficient in achieving satisfactory obstetrical anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia. No cross-infection occurred in the HCWs working in these operations.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.