| Title |
Impedance cardiography as tool for continuous hemodynamic monitoring during cesarean section: randomized, prospective double blind study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-018-0498-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessandro D’Ambrosio, Antonella Cotoia, Renata Beck, Potito Salatto, Lada Zibar, Gilda Cinnella |
| Abstract |
Impedance Cardiography (ICG) is a non-invasive tool for continuous hemodynamic monitoring. Aims of our study were to assess the utility of ICG to evaluate the hemodynamic impact of 6 mg (GL6) vs 8 mg (GL8) levobupivacaine combined with fentanyl in healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean section; secondary, to compare the duration and quality of analgesia and anesthesia. Sixty-two women receiving combined spinal-epidural (CSE) for elective cesarean delivery were randomly allocated to GL6 or GL8 groups. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), cardiac index (CI), systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI), heart rate (HR), stroke volume index (SVI) were recorded from Tbaseline to 31 min after CSE by ICG. Sensory and motor blocks, patients and surgeons satisfaction, neonatal data were also recorded. Fifteen of 32 patients in GL6 and 15 of 30 patients in GL8 experienced hypotension at T2 vs Tbaseline (P < .001) and SVRI reduction (P = .035 and P < .001 respectively). MAP, CI and SVRI were always slightly higher in GL6 vs GL8. HR and SVI remained stable until the end of surgery in all patients. Total ephedrine requirements was higher in GL8 (P = .010). The onset and offset time of sensory and motor block were similar in both groups, but the number of patients with motor block was lower in GL6 vs GL8 (P = .001). Patients and surgeon satisfaction scores, the number of patients needed systemic rescue doses, neonatal data were similar in both groups. ICG is a useful noninvasive tool to monitor continuously hemodynamics during cesarean section. The hemodynamic stability, the satisfying sensory block and rapid mobilization provided by low levobupivacaine dose may be particularly advantageous in obstetric patients. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03170427 . Retrospectively Registered (Date of registration: May 2017). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | 50% |
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Engineering | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 32 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#13,509,734
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#433
of 1,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,246
of 330,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#12
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,510 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.