I read with interest the article by Kinsella et al [1] on rapid sequence spinals for category one caesarean sections. From my experience of being the anaesthetist on call for 4 obstetric units over the past few years, the category one sections, especially those which occur out of hours are very dramatic affairs, with the patient being wheeled down the theatre by the obstetric team and myself meeting them just before they enter the theatre. There is no time to establish a rapport with the patient, or obtain anything other than a quick history and basic consent. The patient is understandably very anxious, as are the midwives and the obstetric trainees. If I were to suggest a regional, I would not receive any support from the rest of the team, other than from the operating department practitioner. For the rapid sequence spinal to succeed, a team effort is essential. This may be possible in the daytime where senior staff are around, and also there are more pairs of hands to help attach monitoring, position patient, etc. During out of hours, the obstetricians rush to scrub up as soon as the patient is in theatre, and helping the anaesthetist is the last thing on their minds. Furthermore, a spinal done in a hurry, with an anxious, less than cooperative patient, is more likely to fail.
I am a firm believer of regional anaesthesia for obstetrics, but unless there is a change in the way category one sections are viewed by the rest of the team, it is very difficult to suggest regional anaesthesia, at least as a trainee. If the patient has factors suggesting a difficult airway, such as morbid obesity, then I would suggest a regional regardless of the urgency. In all other cases, in the current climate of the obstetric units that I have worked in, a general anaesthetic is probably the easiest option.
Rashmi Menon
ST5 Anaesthetics
St James University Hospital
Leeds
References
1. Kinsella SM, Girgirah K, Scrutton MJL. Rapid sequence spina lanaesthesia for category-1 urgency caesarean section: a case series. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 664–669.