PUERPERAE’S QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE EARLY POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD AFTER CAESAREAN SECTION
https://doi.org/10.34822/2304-9448-2021-4-104-109
Abstract
The study aims to assess in the early postoperative period the puerperae’s quality of life who underwent caesarean section, with various anesthesia applied. Material and methods. The quality of life of 310 patients after caesarean section has been assessed. Epidural anesthesia was used for patients in the main group (n =112). Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia and prolonged epidural anesthesia were used for patients in the comparison group (n = 95). Epidural anesthesia was used for patients in the control group (n = 103). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were used for pain relief during postoperative period. The SF-36 questionnaire was used to assess the patients’ quality of life. The statistical data processing was conducted with Statistica 10.0. Results. In the course of the study, the most acceptable indicators of the quality of life have been recorded in the group of patients who received prolonged epidural anesthesia in caesarean section.
About the Authors
R. I. Ilyichev
Federal Research and Clinical Center of Intensive Care Medicine and Rehabilitology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate, Department of Pathophysiology
E-mail: ros40@yandex.ru
A. N. Kuzovlev
V. A. Negovsky Research Institute of General Reanimatology, Federal Research and Clinical Center of Intensive Care Medicine and Rehabilitology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Sciences (Medicine), Docent, Deputy Director, Head
E-mail: artem_kuzovlev@mail.ru
V. T. Dolgikh
V. A. Negovsky Research Institute of General Reanimatology, Federal Research and Clinical Center of Intensive Care Medicine and Rehabilitology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Sciences (Medicine), Professor, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, Chief Researcher, Laboratory of Clinical Pathophysiology of Critical Conditions
E-mail: prof_doldikh@mail.ru
References
1. Betran A. P., Ye J., Moller A.-B., Zhang J., Gulmezoglu A. M., Torloni M. R. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990–2014 // PLoS One. 2016. Vol. 11, No. 2. P. e0148343.
2. Шмаков Р. Г., Баев О. Р., Пекарев О. Г., Пырегов А. В., Приходько А. М., Павлович С. В. Кесарево сечение. Показания, хирургическая техника, методы обезболивания. М. :Системные решения, 2016.
3. Caesarean Section (NICE Clinical Guideline 132). 2011.
4. CORONIS Collaborative Group investigators, Abalos E., Addo V., Brocklehurst P. et al. Caesarean Section Surgical Techniques (CORONIS): A Fractional, Factorial, Unmasked, Randomised Controlled Trial // Lancet. 2013. Vol. 382, Is. 9888. P. 234–248.
5. Кесарево сечение. Проблемы абдоминального акушерства: руководство для врачей / под общ. ред. В. И. Краснопольского. 3-е изд., перераб. и доп. М. : СИМК, 2018. 224 с.
6. Chestnut D., Wong C., Tsen L., Kee W., Beilin Y., Mhyre J. Chestnut’s Obstetric Anesthesia: Principles and Practice, 5th edition. Elsevier Science, 2014. 1303 p.
7. Серов В. Н., Адамян Л. В., Филиппов О. С., Артымук Н. В., Белокриницкая Т. Е., Кан Н. Е. и др. Кесарево сечение. Показания, методы обезболивания, хирургическая техника, антибиотикопрофилактика, ведение послеоперационного периода : клинич. рекомендации (протокол -лечения). M., 2016. 38 с.
8. Адамян Л. В., Артымук Н. В., Баев О. Р., Белокриницкая Т. Е., Краснопольский В. И., Куликов А. В. и др. Анестезия при операции кесарева сечения // Проблемы репродукции. 2018. Т. 24 (S6). С. 522–550.
9. Bucklin B. A., Baysinger C. L., Gambling D. R. A Practical Approach to Obstetric Anesthesia, 2nd edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2016. 576 p.
10. Wilson R. D., Caughey A. B., Wood S. L. et al. Guidelines for Antenatal and Preoperative Care in Cesarean Delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society Recommendations (Part 1) // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018. Vol. 219, Is. 6. P. 523.e1–523.e15.
11. Jing C., Wang C. Combining Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia versus Single-Shot Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Meta-Analysis of 5 Randomized Controlled Trials // Med Sci Monit. 2019. Vol. 25. P. 2859–2867.
12. Klimek M., Rossaint R., van de Velde M., Heesen M. Combined Spinal-Epidural vs. Spinal Anaesthesia for Caesarean Section: Meta-Analysis and Trial-Sequential Analysis // Anaesthesia. 2018. Vol. 73, Is 7. P. 875–888.
13. Lipman S. S., Cohen S., Mhyre J. et al. Challenging the 4- to 5-Minute Rule: From Perimortem Cesarean to Resuscitative Hysterotomy // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016. Vol. 215, Is. 1. P. 129–131.
14. Huang J., Cao C., Nelson G., Wilson R. D. A Review of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Principles Used for Scheduled Caesarean Delivery // J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019. Vol. 41, Is. 12. P. 1775–1788.
15. Fuchs F., Benhamou D. Post-Partum Management After Cesarean Delivery. Guidelines for Clinical Practice // J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2015. Vol. 44, Is. 10. P. 1111–1117.
16. Таштанбекова Ц. Б., Чуенкова Е. А., Евстратов А. А., Зиганшина Л. Е. Использование и стоимость обезболивания при кесаревом сечении // Казан. мед. журнал. 2020. Т. 101, № 3. С. 418–425. DOI 10.17816/KMU2020-418.
17. Gerbeshagen H. J., Aduckathil S., van Wijck A. J. M., Peelen L. M., Kalkman C. J., Meissner W. Pain Intensity on the First Day After Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Comparing 179 Surgical Procedures // Anesthesiology. 2013. Vol. 118, Is. 4. P. 934–944.
18. Anesthesia for Cesarean Section / Ed. G. Capogna. Switz : Springer Intern Publ., 2017. 224 p.
19. Caughey A. B., Wood S. L., Macones G. A. et al. Guidelines for Intraoperative Care in Cesarean Delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society Recommendations (Part 2) // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018. Vol. 219, Is. 6. 533–544.
20. Berghella V. Cesarean Birth: Postoperative Issues. 2016. URL: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/cesarean-birthpostoperative-issues?topicRef=4475&source=see_link (дата обращения: 08.09.2021).
21. Hamburger J., Beilin Y. Systemic Adjunct Analgesics for Cesarean Delivery: A Narrative Review // Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019. Vol. 40. P. 101–118.
22. Macones G. A., Caughey A. B., Wood S. L. et al. Guidelines for Postoperative Care in Cesarean Delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations (Part 3) // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019. Vol. 221, Is. 3. P. 247. e1–247.e9.
23. Полушин Ю. С., Коростелев Ю. М., Вартанова И. В. и др. Болевой синдром после родов и его влияние на качество жизни // Анестезиология и реаниматология. 2015. Т. 60, № 2. С. 47–50.
24. Di Spiezio Sardo A., Saccone G., McCurdy R., Bujold E., Bifulco G., Berghella V. Risk of Cesarean Scar Defect Following Single- vs Double-Layer Uterine Closure: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials // Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017. Vol.
25. , Is. 5. P. 578–583.
26. Овечкин А. М. Послеоперационное обезболивание в акушерстве и гинекологии (аналитический обзор) // Региональная анестезия и лечение острой боли. 2014. Т. 8, № 2. С. 5–16.
27. Bamigboye A. A., Hofmeyr G. J. Closure versus Non-Closure of the Peritoneum at Caesarean Section: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes // Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014. P. CD000163.
28. Lyell D. J., Caughey A. B., Hu E., Blumenfeld Y., El-Sayed Y. Y., Daniels K. Rectus Muscle and Visceral Peritoneum Closure at Cesarean Delivery and Intraabdominal Adhesions // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012. Vol. 206, Is. 6. P. 515.e1–515.e5.
29. Heesen M., Bohmer J., Brinck E. C. V., Kontinen V. K., Klohr S., Rossaint R., Straube S. Intravenous Ketamine During Spinal and General Anaesthesia for Caesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis // Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2015. Vol. 59, Is. 4. P. 414–426.
30. Kang H. W., Kim W. Y., Jin S. J., Kim Y .H., Min T. J., Lee Y. S., Kim K. H. Clinical Evaluation of Anesthesia for High-Risk Cesarean Section at a Tertiary Medical Center: Retrospective Study for 8 Years (2009–2016) // J Int Med Res. 2019. Vol. 47, Is. 9. P. 4365–4373.
31. Недашковский Э. В., Седых С. В., Закурдаев Е. И. Использование визуально-аналоговой шкалы при оценке выраженности болевого синдрома после кесарева сечения в зависимости от метода обезболивания // Анестезиология и реаниматология. 2016. Т. 61, № 5. С. 372–376. DOI 10.18821/0201-7593-2016-61-5-372-376.
32. Гланц С. Медико-биологическая статистика. М. : Практика, 1998. 459 с.
33. Ng S. C., Habib A. S., Sodha S., Carvalho B., Sultan P. High-Dose versus Low-Dose Local Anaesthetic for Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Post-Caesarean Delivery Analgesia: A Meta-Analysis // Br J Anaesth. 2018. Vol. 120, Is. 2. P. 252–263.
34. Lavandhomme P. Postoperative Cesarean Pain: Real but Is It Preventable // Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2018. Vol. 31, Is. 3. P. 262–267.
35. Shakespeare T., Fehlberg M., Slejko T., Taylor J., Sbrinovska I., Bolsin S. Successful Use of “Choice Architecture“ and “Nudge Theory“ in a Quality Improvement Initiative of Analgesia Administration After Caesarean Section // J Eval Clin Pract. 2019. Vol. 25, Is. 1. P. 125–129.
Review
For citations:
Ilyichev R.I., Kuzovlev A.N., Dolgikh V.T. PUERPERAE’S QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE EARLY POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD AFTER CAESAREAN SECTION. Vestnik SurGU. Meditsina. 2021;(4 (50)):104-109. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.34822/2304-9448-2021-4-104-109
Views:
162
Email this article 
