Emergencies in obstetric anaesthesia: a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a narrative review in six areas of obstetric emergencies: category-1 caesarean section; difficult and failed airway; massive obstetric haemorrhage; hypertensive crisis; emergencies related to neuraxial anaesthesia; and maternal cardiac arrest. These areas represent significant research published within the last five years, with emphasis on large multicentre randomised trials, national or international practice guidelines and recommendations from major professional societies. Key topics discussed: prevention and management of failed neuraxial technique; role of high-flow nasal oxygenation and choice of neuromuscular drug in obstetric patients; prevention of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia; management of the difficult and failed obstetric airway; current perspectives on the use of tranexamic acid, fibrinogen concentrate and cell salvage; guidance on neuraxial placement in a thrombocytopenic obstetric patient; management of neuraxial drug errors, local anaesthetic systemic toxicity and unusually prolonged neuraxial block regression; and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use in maternal cardiac arrest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".