The PI is a useful tool for evaluation of successful supraclavicular nerve block. A PI ratio of > 1.4 is a good predictor for block success.

No abstract

BackgroundPost-spinal hypotension is a common maternal complication during cesarean delivery. Aortocaval compression by the gravid uterus has been assumed as a precipitating factor for post-spinal hypotension. The role of left lateral tilting position in improving maternal cardiac output after subarachnoid block (SAB) is unclear. The aim of this work is to investigate the effect of left lateral tilting on maternal hemodynamics after SAB.MethodsA prospective observational study was conducted including 105 full term pregnant women scheduled for cesarean delivery. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, cardiac output (measured by electrical cardiometry), stroke volume, and systemic vascular resistance were recorded in three positions (supine, 150, and 300 left lateral positions) before SAB, after SAB, and after delivery of the fetus.ResultsBefore SAB, no significant hemodynamic changes were reported with left lateral tilting. A significant decrease was reported in mean arterial pressure, cardiac output, stroke volume, and systemic vascular resistance after SAB (in supine position). When performing left lateral tilting, there was an increase in cardiac output, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure. No difference was reported between the two tilt angles (150 and 300).ConclusionsChanging position of full term pregnant woman after SAB from supine to left lateral tilted position results increased cardiac output and mean arterial pressure. There is no difference between the two tilt angles (150 and 300).Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov (NCT02828176) retrospectively registered.

One hundred eighty-four time-matched samples were available for final analysis. Bland-Altman analysis showed excellent accuracy of Sp-Hb compared with Lab-Hb with mean bias of 0.12 g/dL and limits of agreement between -0.56 g/dL and 0.79 g/dL. Excellent correlation was reported between both measures with Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.872. Excellent agreement was also reported between both Delta-Sp-Hb and Delta-Lab-Hb with mean bias of -0.05 and limits of agreement from -0.62 to 0.51 CONCLUSIONS:: Sp-Hb showed accurate precision in both absolute values and trend values compared with Lab-Hb measurement in trauma patients with low hemoglobin levels.

The evolution of non-invasive hemoglobin measuring technology would save time and improve transfusion practice. The validity of pulse co-oximetry hemoglobin (SpHb) measurement in the perioperative setting was previously evaluated; however, the accuracy of SpHb in different volume statuses as well as in different perfusion states was not well investigated. The aim of this work is to evaluate the accuracy and trending of SpHb in comparison to laboratory hemoglobin (Lab-Hb) during acute bleeding and after resuscitation. Seventy patients scheduled for major orthopedic procedures with anticipated major blood loss were included. Radical-7 device was used for continuous assessment of SpHb, volume status [via pleth variability index (PVI)] and perfusion status [via perfusion index (PI)]. Lab-Hb and SpHb were measured at three time-points, a baseline reading, after major bleeding, and after resuscitation. Samples were divided into fluid-responsive and fluid non-responsive samples, and were also divided into high-PI and low-PI samples. Accuracy of SpHb was determined using Bland-Altman analysis. Trending of SpHb was evaluated using polar plot analysis. We obtained 210 time-matched readings. Fluid non-responsive samples were 106 (50.5%) whereas fluid responsive samples were 104 (49.5%). Excellent correlation was reported between Lab-Hb and SpHb (r = 0.938). Excellent accuracy with moderate levels of agreement was also reported between both measures among all samples, fluid non-responsive samples, fluid-responsive samples, high-PI samples, and low-PI samples [Mean bias (limits of agreement): 0.01 (- 1.33 and 1.34) g/dL, - 0.08 (- 1.27 and 1.11) g/dL, 0.09 (- 1.36 and 1.54) g/dL, 0.01 (- 1.34 to 1.31) g/dL, and 0.04 (- 1.31 to 1.39) g/dL respectively]. Polar plot analysis showed good trending ability for SpHb as a follow up monitor. In conclusion, SpHb showed excellent correlation with Lab-Hb in fluid responders, fluid non-responders, low-PI, and high PI states. Despite a favorable mean bias of 0.01 g/dL for SpHb, the relatively wide levels of agreement (- 1.3 to 1.3 g/dL) might limit its accuracy. SpHb showed good performance as a trend monitor.