This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Rudolph H. de Jong, MD

JAMA. 1977;237(1):53-54.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In providing pain relief to the parturient, regional anesthesia long was considered less depressant to the newborn infant than general anesthesia. This notion came about because local anesthetic is deposited mear the neural target, whereas general anesthetics must use the bloodstream as an intermediate carrier to the cerebral target. Although the local anesthetic eventually is absorbed into the bloodstream too, maternal concentrations of 3µg drug per milliliter blood generally were considered innocuous to the infant.

By the mid-1970s, however, several articles^1,2 shattered that complacent assumption. Even though the infants' Apgar scores were near-optimal, delicate tests of the immature motor system disclosed substandard performance. Clinically too, babies delivered of mothers receiving peridural anesthesia often seemed to be "floppy but awake." Moreover, the lidocaine (Xylocaine) or mepivacaine (Carbocaine) used for peridural blockade remained in the fetal bloodstream for several hours after birth.³ Furthermore, epinephrine, frequently added as a local vasoconstrictor . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?