British journal of anaesthesia
-
The under-representation of women in academic leadership roles, including in anaesthesiology, is a well-documented phenomenon that has persisted for decades despite more women attending medical school, participating in anaesthesiology residencies, and joining academic faculties. The percentage of female anaesthesiologists who hold senior academic ranks or leadership roles, such as chair, lags behind the percentage of female anaesthesiologists overall. Trends towards increasing the numbers of women serving in educational leadership roles, specifically residency programme directors, suggest that there are areas in which academic anaesthesiology has been, and can continue, improving gender imbalance. Continued institutional efforts to recruit women into anaesthesiology, reduce gender bias, and promote interventions that foster gender equity in hiring and promotion will continue to benefit women, academic anaesthesiology departments, and the healthcare system overall.
-
Why is this important?
Hypotension associated with spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section is common. Increased interested over the past decade has resulted in some consensus recommending phenylephrine infusions, however there are few studies that directly compare this to other vasopressors.
What did Singh and team do?
By analysing 52 high-to-moderate quality RCTs and over 4,000 patients, Singh performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to indirectly compare various vasopressors.
It's notable that umbilical artery base excess was used as the primary outcome, although other neonatal and maternal outcomes (nausea, vomiting, bradycardia) were secondarily assessed. Nonetheless, this study prioritised the fetal effects of hypotension management.
"We selected umbilical arterial BE as our primary outcome because it is thought to represent the effect of pronounced fetal hypoxaemia, anaerobic metabolism, and accumulation of non-volatile acids, that is the metabolic component of acidaemia."
Ok, what's a Bayesian network meta-analysis anyway?
A network meta-analysis compares trial interventions indirectly, when researchers are interested in a comparison between two factors (eg. use of metaraminol vs phenylephrine) that have not been directly compared by included RCTs (eg. a study comparing metaraminol vs ephedrine, and a study of phenylepherine vs ephedrine). A Bayesian NMA allows simultaneous comparison of multiple-arm trials, considering prior probability along with the likelihood of outcome rank between interventions.
A Bayesian NMA acknowledges the uncertainty of research conclusions and the probabilistic nature of clinical decision making.
Singh concluded...
Norepinephrine (noradrenaline), metaraminol, and mephentermine showed the lowest likelihood of adverse neonatal acid-base effects, and ephedrine the greatest.
"...norepinephrine, metaraminol, and mephentermine had the lowest probability of adversely affecting the fetal acid-base status as assessed by their effect on umbilical arterial base excess (probability rank order: norepinephrine > mephentermine > metaraminol > phenylephrine > ephedrine)."
When combined, there was a 66% probability that norepinephrine & mephentermine are the best agents for supporting umbilical a. BE.
There was a 66% probability that metaraminol is the best treatment for optimising umbilical artery pH, an 85% combined-probability that metaraminol & norepinephrine are best for umbilical a. pCO2, and 85% that they are the two best agents for avoiding maternal nausea and vomiting.
Be smart
Given the very nature of meta-analyses and the challenge of indirect comparison among agents from heterogenous studies, the conclusions are only suggestive of the benefits of phenylephrine alternatives. A large RCT is still needed! (And despite it's popularity in some countries, there are still only a small number of trials of metaraminol.)
Nevertheless, other than for bradycardia, ephedrine was most likely the worst for all outcomes, reinforcing past conclusions that there are better pressor choices.
summary -
Recent studies suggest that female researchers are less visible on social media. The objective of this observational work was to compare the use of professional social networks between male and female anaesthesia researchers. ⋯ In anaesthesia, the visibility of female researchers on the social network dedicated to scientific research is lower than that of male researchers.