Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 12-17

Effect of ondansetron on hypotension andbradycardia associated with spinal anesthesia during cesarean section


1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Shibin Elkom, Egypt
2 Department of Anesthesiology and ICU, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Shibin Elkom, Egypt
3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Al-Shohada Central Hospital, Menoufia, Egypt

Date of Submission03-Sep-2016
Date of Acceptance06-Nov-2016
Date of Web Publication14-Jun-2018

Correspondence Address:
Mai I AbdelHamid
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Al-Shohada Central Hospital, Al-Shohada, Menoufia 32511
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1110-2098.234215

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Objective
The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section in overcoming the associated nausea, vomiting, bradycardia, and hypotension.
Background
Ondansetron, a widely used antiemetic and serotonin antagonist, has been safely used to blunt the Bezold–Jarisch reflex, resulting in less bradycardia and hypotension in humans undergoing spinal anesthesia.
Patients and methods
One hundred parturients scheduled for elective cesarean section were randomly allocated into two groups. Before induction of spinal anesthesia groupI(n=50) received intravenous ondansetron 4mg and groupII(n=50) received normal saline. Blood pressure, heart rate(HR), nausea and vomiting, shivering, vasopressor requirements, and Apgar score at 1 and 5min were assessed.
Results
Decreases in systolic arterial pressure were significantly lower in groupI than in groupII. Patients in groupI had significantly less requirement for vasopressor(P=0.005), needed lower dose of vasopressor(P=0.01), and had significantly lower incidences of nausea and vomiting (P=0.03). Decreases in HR were significantly lower in groupI than in groupII just after spinal anesthesia(P=0.02), at 20min(P=0.01), and 50min(P=0.02). Decreases in mean blood pressure were significantly lower in groupI than in groupII just after spinal anesthesia(P=0.007).
Conclusion
In parturient women undergoing elective cesarean section, intravenous 4mg ondansetron significantly decreased the hypotension, HR fluctuation, and vasopressor doses used.

Keywords: cesarean section, 5.hydroxytryptamine, ondansetron, spinal anesthesia


How to cite this article:
Shabana AA, Elkholy NI, Mohamed AM, AbdelHamid MI. Effect of ondansetron on hypotension andbradycardia associated with spinal anesthesia during cesarean section. Menoufia Med J 2018;31:12-7

How to cite this URL:
Shabana AA, Elkholy NI, Mohamed AM, AbdelHamid MI. Effect of ondansetron on hypotension andbradycardia associated with spinal anesthesia during cesarean section. Menoufia Med J [serial online] 2018 [cited 2018 Jul 18];31:12-7. Available from: http://www.mmj.eg.net/text.asp?2018/31/1/12/234215




  Introduction Top


Spinal anesthesia has been shown to be an easy, rapid, and safe technique for cesarean section. Nevertheless, it has some side effects; most common among these side effects are hypotension, bradycardia, intraoperative nausea and vomiting in more than 66% of patients[1].

Hypotension after spinal anesthesia is initially due to a blockade of sympathetic fibers leading to a drop in systemic vascular resistance. Maternal symptoms of low blood pressure(BP) include nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and decreased consciousness [2]. Spinal-induced bradycardia is multifactorial but is in part due to the Bezold–Jarisch reflex. This reflex is mediated by serotonin receptors within the wall of the ventricle in response to systemic hypotension [3]. It is thought that the stimulation of these peripheral 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype3(5-HT3) receptors results in increased parasympathetic activity and decreased sympathetic activity, resulting in bradycardia, vasodilatation, and hypotension [4]. Ondansetron is one of the new classes of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists. Ondansetron, a widely used antiemetic and serotonin antagonist, has been safely used to blunt the Bezold–Jarisch reflex, resulting in less bradycardia and hypotension in humans undergoing spinal anesthesia [5].

Ondansetron has been demonstrated to be an effective and well-tolerated drug for the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting.


  Patients and Methods Top


This study was conducted at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at Al-Shohada centralHospital. After obtaining local ethics committee approval (provided by the hospital) and written informed consent, the study was conducted on 100 pregnant women with physical status American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA) I–II who were aged 18–45years and subjected to elective cesarean delivery at term. This is a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded study. Exclusion criteria were the following:

  1. Hypersensitivity to ondansetron
  2. Contraindication for spinal anesthesia:


    1. History of allergic reaction to local anesthetic
    2. Bleeding disorders
    3. Aspirin ingestion in the preceding week
    4. Mental diseases
    5. Pre-existing neurological or spinal diseases
    6. Infection at the site of injection
    7. Unstable hemodynamic


  3. Hypertensive disorders with pregnancy
  4. History of nausea and/or vomiting during the 24h before induction of anesthesia
  5. Cardiovascular insufficiency
  6. Patient receiving selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or migraine medication
  7. Patient refusal.


Patients were randomized(during preanesthetic consultation) to one of two groups using a random sequence: groupI received 4mg ondansetron in 10ml saline intravenously 5min before spinal puncture and groupII received 10ml of saline in the same way and at the same timing. Each group included 50patients.

In the preanesthetic room women received 500ml lactated Ringer's solution that was given over30min.

In the operating room baseline values of pulse oximetry, noninvasive BP, and ECG were recorded.

The spinal technique was performed with the patient in thesittingposition at L3–L4 or L4–L5 with 2ml hyperbaric bupivacaine 5mg/ml, which was administered after confirmation of cerebrospinal fluid free flow without barbotage through a 25-G spinal needle. The patients were immediately placed in the supine position with 15° left tilt, and the sensory block was assessed according to loss of pinprick sensation(25-G hypodermic needle) every 5min for 15min, beyond which parturients were excluded if the sensory level was below T6.

Surgery started as soon as the T6 dermatome was anesthetized; patients who failed to reach at least this level were excluded from the study, and general anesthesia was then administered at the attending anesthesiologist's discretion.

The women were given 1000ml Ringer's lactate throughout the surgery.

Hemodynamic parameters was measured and recorded before spinal anesthesia administration, just after spinal anesthesia, and at 10-min intervals until the end of surgery and at the first and second hour after surgery.

Hypotension, defined as a decrease from baseline values of 20% or more in systolic arterial pressure less than 80mmHg, was treated with ephedrine bolus(6mg) until restoration of baseline values.

Bradycardia was defined as a 30% drop in heart rate(HR) or up to 45 beats per min. We took note of the total dose of ephedrine needed. Episodes of nausea, vomiting, and shivering were recorded. Neonatal Apgar scores were routinely determined at 1 and 5min after delivery.

Method of randomization

The method of sampling used in the study was simple random sampling. The method of selection was the ideal bowl method. We made a frame and used 100 paper cards. Each of these papers had a serial number taken from the frame. All the papers were similar in every respect, folded in the same manner and put in the ideal bowl, and thoroughly mixed before selection. Selection was done without replacement.

Double-blinded study means that the drug was prepared by one set of anesthesiologists and given by another one and neither the patient nor the doctor was aware of the type of drug given.

Sample size calculation

The sample size calculation assumed that the expectedpercentageof vomiting in groupI (ondansetron) would be 0.0% and that in groupII(controls) would be 23.33% [6]. To achieve 90% power to detect this difference with a significance level of 2.5% it was estimated that 41 participants would be required per group. With a withdrawal/nonevaluable subject rate of 20%, a total of 50 participants per group were recruited, leading to a total sample size of 100 participants.

Statistical analysis

Data were statistically described in terms of range, mean±SD, median, frequencies, and percentages when appropriate. Comparison of quantitative variables between the study groups was done using the Student t-test for independent samples. For comparing categorical data, the c2- test was performed. Fisher's exact P test was used when the expected frequency was less than 5. APvalue less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical calculations were performed using computer programs.


  Results Top


The mean age was 26.5years, the mean BMI was 31.8kg/cm 2, the mean gestational age was 38.65weeks, and the meanorder of pregnancy was 2.15.

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards diastolic blood pressure(DBP), mean blood pressure(MBP), and mean pulse rate before spinal anesthesia[Table1] and [Figure1].
Table 1: Hemodynamic of the studied groups before spinal anesthesia

Click here to view
Figure 1: Hemodynamic of the studied groups before spinal anesthesia. DBP, diastolic blood pressure; MBP, mean blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

Click here to view


There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards the mean HR before spinal anesthesia and 10, 30, 40min and 1 and 2h after induction. But there were statistically significant differences between the two groups as regards the mean pulse rate just after spinal anesthesia(P=0.02), after 20min(P=0.01), and after 50min(P=0.02).

Systolic blood pressure(SBP) measurements were significantly decreased in groupII when compared with groupI[Table2] and [Figure2].
Table 2: Systolic blood pressure of studied groups after spinal anesthesia

Click here to view
Figure 2: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) of the studied groups after spinal anesthesia.

Click here to view


There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups as regards the MBP after 10, 20, 30, 40, 50min and 1 and 2h, respectively. However, there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups just after spinal anesthesia [Table3] and [Figure3].
Table 3: Mean arterial pressure of the studied groups after spinal anesthesia

Click here to view
Figure 3: Mean arterial pressure (MAP) of the studied groups after spinal anesthesia.

Click here to view


There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards the need for vasopressor. The need for vasopressor was significantly lower in groupI than in groupII(30vs. 70%, respectively); meanwhile the need for no vasopressor was significantly higher in groupI than in groupII(58vs. 42%, respectively) [Table4] and [Figure4]. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards the dose of vasopressor required.
Table 4: Vasopressor and its dose in the studied groups

Click here to view
Figure 4: Vasopressor need in the studied groups.

Click here to view


There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards nausea and vomiting. However, there was no statistically significant difference as regards shivering[Table5] and [Figure5].
Table 5: Nausea, vomiting, and shivering of studied groups

Click here to view
Figure 5: Nausea, vomiting, and shivering in the studied groups.

Click here to view


There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards Apgar score at 1 and 5min and with respect to neonatal intensive care unit admission.


  Discussion Top


Spinal anesthesia is one of the regional techniques commonly used in cesarean section parturients to avoid most of the risks associated with general anesthesia. However, spinal anesthesia carries some risks also: the most commonriskis hypotension due to almost complete sympathetic block as the level of block must be at T4 for adequate coverage plus the effect of gravid uterus on the venous return [7].

This study shows that the effect of spinal anesthesia on BP, MBP, and HR was reduced with the use of intravenous 4mg ondansetron given 5min before spinal anesthesia in pregnant women subjected to elective cesarean section.

Campagna and Cartner [3] observed that blockade of the 5-HT3 receptor antagonized the Bezold–Jarisch reflex induced by serotonin in anesthetized rats.

The results of our study are in agreement with those of a study conducted by Sahoo etal. [8], who proved that ondansetron attenuated spinal-induced hypotension if given intravenously in cesarean section patients before spinal anesthesia. The use of phenylephrine was significantly more common in patients in the control group compared with the ondansetron group.

Also, Rashad and Farmawy [9] compared between two strong antiemetic medications–namely, ondansetron and granisetron–as regards their effects on BP changes, sensory block, and motor block on spinal anesthesia given to cesarean section parturients as both medications have the same mechanism of action. There was significant increase in the use of ephedrine in the placebo group and granisetron group compared with the ondansetron group. It is concluded that in parturient women undergoing elective cesarean section, intravenous 4mg ondansetron before subarachnoid block significantly decreases both hypotension and the doses of vasopressor used. Our study is in agreement with this.

Also, Owczuk etal. [10] found that ondansetron given intravenously attenuates the fall of SBP and MBP but does not have an influence on DBP or HR, which concurs with our results.

Meng etal. [11] investigated the dose-dependent effects of ondansetron preloading on maternal SBP, DBP, and mean arterial pressure and neonatal outcomes. They demonstrated that intravenous injection of 4 or 6mg ondansetron preloading with rapid crystalloid infusion could significantly reduce the incidence of maternal hypotension and nausea and stabilize the maternal hemodynamic. They found that 4mg of ondansetron preloading was the optimal dose to prevent maternal hypotension, nausea, and other adverse effects during cesarean delivery. This concurs with our results.

Khalifa [12] concluded that prophylactic intravenously use of 1mg granisetron, 4mg ondansetron, and 10mg ephedrine reduced the severity of spinal-induced hypotension, the need for rescue vasopressor, and incidence of nausea.

As regards the incidence of nausea and vomiting, ondansetron reduced the number of episodes of nausea and vomiting, as in the study by George etal. [13] and Yazigi etal. [14].

Shivanand etal. [15] suggested that prophylactic ondansetron 4mg is more efficacious in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. Our study is in agreement with this.

Zahedi and Rouzbeh Kargar [16] concluded that there was no significant difference between ondansetron and metoclopramide for reducing intraoperative nausea and vomiting during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.

Metoclopramide(20 or 0.2mg/kg, intravenous) seems to be effective in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Because of its short half-life, metoclopramide should be given near the end of surgery to ensure efficacy in the early postoperative period [17].

Atif and Ahmed [18] found that ondansetron 4mg is more effective than propofol in preventing emetic symptoms during and after delivery in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Moreover, ondansetron reduced the requirement for further rescue antiemetic, which may provide great benefit. Our results are in agreement with this.

Ruqaya and Mohamed [6] revealed that a prespinal ondansetron 8mg intravenous and preloading with lactated Ringer's solution 10ml/kg given over30min before spinal anesthesia during cesarean section reduced the incidence of postspinal hypotension, bradycardia, nausea, vomiting, and shivering.

Another 5-HT3 antagonist, granisetron, at 1mg was intravenously administered by Eldaba and Amr [19] and they found that it could reduce bradycardia and hypotension and the need for vasopressors.


  Conclusion Top


It is concluded that in parturient women undergoing elective cesarean section, intravenous 4mg ondansetron significantly decreases hypotension, HR fluctuation, and the dose of vasopressor used.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Bucklin BA, Hawkins JL, Anderson JR, Ullrich FA. Obstetric anesthesia workforce survey: twenty-year update. Anesthesiology 2005; 103:645–653.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Balki M, Carvalho JC. Intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean section under regional anesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth 2005; 14:230–241.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Campagna JA, Cartner C. Clinical relevance of Bezold–Jarisch reflex. JAm Soc Anesthesiol 2003; 98:1250–1260.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Nichols E, Nichols CD. Serotonin receptors. Chem Rev 2008; 108:1614–1641.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Lahsaei SM, Amini A, Tabatabei SM, Mehrabani G. Acomparison between cetirizine and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults. JRes Med Sci 2012; 17:760–763.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Ruqaya MG, Mohamed AA. The effect of ondansetron on outcome of spinal anaesthesia during caesarean section. Al-Azhar Assuit Med J 2012; 10:222–240.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Glosten B. Anesthesia for obstetrics. In: Miller RD, editor. Anesthesia for obstetrics. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2000. pp.2025–68.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Sahoo T, SenDasgupta C, Goswami A, Hazra A. Reduction in spinal-induced hypotension with ondansetron in parturients undergoing caesarean section: a double-blind randomised, placebo-controlled study. Int J Obstet Anesth 2012; 21:24–28.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Rashad MM, Farmawy MS. Effectsof intravenous ondansetron and granisetron on hemodynamic changes and motor and sensory blockade induced by spinal anesthesia in parturients undergoing cesarean section. Egypt J Anaesth 2013; 29:369–374.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Owczuk R, Wenski W, Polak-Krzeminska A, Twardowski P, Dylczyk SA, Sawicka W, etal. Ondansetron given intravenously attenuates arterial blood pressure drop due to spinal anesthesia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2008; 33:332–339.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Meng W, Lang Z, Qun W, Ming-Kun S, Yan-Yun Y, Jun-Jing Y, etal. Efficacy of prophylactic intravenous ondansetron on the prevention of hypotension during cesarean delivery: a dose-dependent study. Int J Clin Exp Med 2014; 7:5210–5216.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Khalifa OSM. Acomparative study of prophylactic intravenous granisetron, ondansetron, and ephedrine in attenuating hypotension and its effect on motor and sensory block in elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Ain Shams J Anesthesiol 2015; 8:166–172.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
George RB, Allen TK, Habib AS. Serotonin receptor antagonists for the prevention and treatment of pruritus, nausea and vomiting in women undergoing caesarean delivery with intrathecal morphine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:174–182.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Yegin A, Yilmaz M, Karsli B, Erman M. Analgesic effects of intrathecal neostigmine in perianal surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2003; 20:404–408.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Shivanand PT, Vasantha KJ, Ravi R. Efficacyof ondansetron as antiemetic agent in preventing the incidence of PONV in LSCS under subarachnoid block. Int J Res Med Sci 2013; 1:354–358.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Zahedi H, Rouzbeh Kargar L. Comparing the prophylaxis effect of ondansetron and metoclopramide against intraoperative nausea and vomiting during spinal anesthesia for caesarean section. JBabol Univ Med Sci 2004; 6:32–36.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Ashraf ME, Ashraf MM, Ahmed AM, Noha AA. Challenge of morbid obesity in obstetric anesthesia. Menouf Med J 2015; 28:308–314.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Atif AG, Ahmed M. Evaluation of ondansetron and low dose propofol for control of emetic symptoms during cesarean delivery with spinalanesthesia. Med J Cairo Univ 2005; 918:921–973.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Eldaba AA, AmrYM. Intravenous granisetron attenuates hypotension during spinal anesthesia in caesarean delivery: a double-blind prospective randomised controlled study. JAnaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2015; 31:329–332.  Back to cited text no. 19
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table1], [Table2], [Table3], [Table4], [Table5]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Patients and Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed90    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded45    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]