Neurodevelopmental impact of prenatal regional or general anaesthesia: An ambidirectional pilot cohort study

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Vanja Courteille , Côme Sauvage , Francis Veyckemans , Shahad Albadri , Lorna Le Stanc , Gilles Orliaguet , Jean-Luc Hanouz , Denis Vivien , Nicolas Poirel , Jean-Philippe Salaün
{"title":"Neurodevelopmental impact of prenatal regional or general anaesthesia: An ambidirectional pilot cohort study","authors":"Vanja Courteille ,&nbsp;Côme Sauvage ,&nbsp;Francis Veyckemans ,&nbsp;Shahad Albadri ,&nbsp;Lorna Le Stanc ,&nbsp;Gilles Orliaguet ,&nbsp;Jean-Luc Hanouz ,&nbsp;Denis Vivien ,&nbsp;Nicolas Poirel ,&nbsp;Jean-Philippe Salaün","doi":"10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Up to 2% of pregnant women undergo non-obstetric surgery, yet literature on the long-term effects of prenatal anaesthesia exposure is scarce and conflicting. This study aimed to assess executive functions in children born to mothers exposed to general anaesthesia (GA) or regional anaesthesia (RA) for non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy, compared with children born to women who did not undergo surgery. The second aim was to assess executive functions, considering potential confounding factors affecting brain development.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This single-centre ambidirectional pilot cohort study included children born between 2011 and 2018 at Caen Normandy University Hospital, with retrospective identification of children born to mothers exposed, or not, to GA or RA during pregnancy. Children with a diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder were excluded. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed using the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) parental questionnaire. Analyses included potential confounding factors. We conducted an analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the three groups for the primary outcome and univariate ANOVAs to study the influence of confounders on BRIEF scoring.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ninety-four children (6.3–10.3 years old) were studied: children born to mothers exposed to GA (<em>n</em> = 40), RA (<em>n</em> = 13), and the control group (<em>n</em> = 41). No difference in BRIEF scores was observed among the groups. No confounding factors influenced this result.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study is the first to compare neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born to mothers exposed, or not, to RA or GA during pregnancy. No difference in BRIEF scores was observed. Larger studies with detailed executive function analyses and daily life habits are needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48762,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","volume":"44 6","pages":"Article 101592"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556825001249","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Up to 2% of pregnant women undergo non-obstetric surgery, yet literature on the long-term effects of prenatal anaesthesia exposure is scarce and conflicting. This study aimed to assess executive functions in children born to mothers exposed to general anaesthesia (GA) or regional anaesthesia (RA) for non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy, compared with children born to women who did not undergo surgery. The second aim was to assess executive functions, considering potential confounding factors affecting brain development.

Methods

This single-centre ambidirectional pilot cohort study included children born between 2011 and 2018 at Caen Normandy University Hospital, with retrospective identification of children born to mothers exposed, or not, to GA or RA during pregnancy. Children with a diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder were excluded. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed using the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) parental questionnaire. Analyses included potential confounding factors. We conducted an analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the three groups for the primary outcome and univariate ANOVAs to study the influence of confounders on BRIEF scoring.

Results

Ninety-four children (6.3–10.3 years old) were studied: children born to mothers exposed to GA (n = 40), RA (n = 13), and the control group (n = 41). No difference in BRIEF scores was observed among the groups. No confounding factors influenced this result.

Conclusions

This study is the first to compare neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born to mothers exposed, or not, to RA or GA during pregnancy. No difference in BRIEF scores was observed. Larger studies with detailed executive function analyses and daily life habits are needed.
产前局部或全身麻醉对神经发育的影响:一项双向先导队列研究。
背景:高达2%的孕妇接受非产科手术,然而关于产前麻醉暴露的长期影响的文献很少且相互矛盾。本研究旨在评估母亲在怀孕期间接受全身麻醉(GA)或区域麻醉(RA)进行非产科手术所生儿童的执行功能,并与未接受手术的母亲所生儿童进行比较。第二个目的是评估执行功能,考虑影响大脑发育的潜在混杂因素。方法:这项单中心双向试点队列研究纳入了2011年至2018年在卡昂诺曼底大学医院出生的儿童,回顾性识别母亲在怀孕期间暴露或未暴露于GA或RA的儿童。诊断为神经发育障碍的儿童被排除在外。使用执行功能行为评定量表(BRIEF)父母问卷评估神经发育结果。分析包括潜在的混杂因素。我们对三组间的主要结局进行方差分析(ANOVA),并对单变量方差分析(ANOVA)研究混杂因素对BRIEF评分的影响。结果:94名儿童(6.3 ~ 10.3岁)被研究:暴露于GA (n = 40)、RA (n = 13)和对照组(n = 41)的母亲所生的儿童。各组间BRIEF评分无差异。没有混杂因素影响这一结果。结论:这项研究首次比较了母亲在怀孕期间暴露或未暴露于类风湿性关节炎或GA的儿童的神经发育结果。BRIEF评分无差异。需要更大规模的研究,包括详细的执行功能分析和日常生活习惯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine (formerly Annales Françaises d''Anesthésie et de Réanimation) publishes in English the highest quality original material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信