A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours

A case series discussing the anaesthetic management... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92" }, "headline": "A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours", "datePublished": "2013-03-21T10:09:19", "dateModified": "2013-12-11T12:31:44", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Alaa A Abd-Elsayed" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Jose Díaz-Gómez" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Gene H Barnett" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Andrea Kurz" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Maria Inton-Santos" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sabri Barsoum" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Rafi Avitsian" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Zeyd Ebrahim" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Vesna Jevtovic-Todorovic" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Ehab Farag" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "Pregnancy may aggravate the natural history of an intracranial tumour, and may even unmask a previously unknown diagnosis. Here we present a series of seven patients who had brain tumours during pregnancy. The aim of this case series is to characterize the current perioperative management and to suggest evidence based guidelines for the anaesthetic management of pregnant females with brain tumours. This is a retrospective study. Information on pregnant patients diagnosed with brain tumours that underwent caesarean section (CS) and/or brain tumour resection from May 2003 through June 2008 was obtained from the Department of General Anaesthesia and the Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumour & Neuro-Oncology Centre (BBTC) at the Cleveland Clinic, OH, USA. The mean age was 34.5 years (range 29-40 years old). Six patients had glioma, two of whom had concomitant craniotomy and CS. Six cases had the tumour in the frontal lobe. Four cases were operated on under general anaesthesia and three underwent awake craniotomy. The neonatal outcomes of the six patients with elective or emergent delivery were six viable infants with normal Apgar scores. Pregnancy was terminated in the 7th patient. In conclusion, good knowledge of the variable anesthetic agents and their effects on the fetus is very important in managing those patients." } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92", "name": "A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients..." } } ] } Home Browse A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Abd-Elsayed AA, Díaz-Gómez J, Barnett GH et al. A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Clinical Practice Article Revised A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] Alaa A Abd-Elsayed 1,2 , Jose Díaz-Gómez 3 , Gene H Barnett 4 , [...] Andrea Kurz 2 , Maria Inton-Santos 3 , Sabri Barsoum 5 , Rafi Avitsian 3 , Zeyd Ebrahim 3 , Vesna Jevtovic-Todorovic 6 , Ehab Farag 2,3 Alaa A Abd-Elsayed 1,2 , Jose Díaz-Gómez 3 , [...] Gene H Barnett 4 , Andrea Kurz 2 , Maria Inton-Santos 3 , Sabri Barsoum 5 , Rafi Avitsian 3 , Zeyd Ebrahim 3 , Vesna Jevtovic-Todorovic 6 , Ehab Farag 2,3 PUBLISHED 11 Dec 2013 Author details Author details 1 Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 2 Department of Outcomes Research, Anesthesia Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 3 Department of General Anesthesia, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 4 Neurological Surgery and Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor & Neuro-Oncology Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 5 Obstetrics & Gynecology Anesthesia, Hillcrest Hospital, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 6 Anesthesiology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22093, USA OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Pregnancy may aggravate the natural history of an intracranial tumour, and may even unmask a previously unknown diagnosis. Here we present a series of seven patients who had brain tumours during pregnancy. The aim of this case series is to characterize the current perioperative management and to suggest evidence based guidelines for the anaesthetic management of pregnant females with brain tumours. This is a retrospective study. Information on pregnant patients diagnosed with brain tumours that underwent caesarean section (CS) and/or brain tumour resection from May 2003 through June 2008 was obtained from the Department of General Anaesthesia and the Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumour & Neuro-Oncology Centre (BBTC) at the Cleveland Clinic, OH, USA. The mean age was 34.5 years (range 29-40 years old). Six patients had glioma, two of whom had concomitant craniotomy and CS. Six cases had the tumour in the frontal lobe. Four cases were operated on under general anaesthesia and three underwent awake craniotomy. The neonatal outcomes of the six patients with elective or emergent delivery were six viable infants with normal Apgar scores. Pregnancy was terminated in the 7th patient. In conclusion, good knowledge of the variable anesthetic agents and their effects on the fetus is very important in managing those patients. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords pregnancy, brain tumours, propofol, dexmedetomidine, remifentanil, anaesthetic Corresponding Author(s) Ehab Farag ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Ehab Farag Competing interests: All authors declare that there are no competing interests. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2013 Abd-Elsayed AA et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Abd-Elsayed AA, Díaz-Gómez J, Barnett GH et al. A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v2 ) First published: 21 Mar 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v1 ) Latest published: 11 Dec 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v2 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 In response to the reviewers comments we adjusted the numbers of cases in our results and discussion sections to reflect the effect of anesthetics used during craniotomy in the pregnant patient only. We also performed some grammar and spelling changes. We also corrected the order of references to make sure they are exactly corresponding to the text within the manuscript. In response to the reviewers comments we adjusted the numbers of cases in our results and discussion sections to reflect the effect of anesthetics used during craniotomy in the pregnant patient only. We also performed some grammar and spelling changes. We also corrected the order of references to make sure they are exactly corresponding to the text within the manuscript. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Michael James Paech See the authors' detailed response to the review by Carolyn F Weiniger See the authors' detailed response to the review by Hiroyuki Sumikura READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction Pregnancy may increase the growth of a previously existing intracranial tumour, and can even unmask a previously undiscovered tumour. A previous study that included 8 patients who had been diagnosed antenatally with a malignant brain tumour stated that all had severe neurological manifestations, and six of them had a severe neurological event that lead to premature termination of the pregnancy 1 . It was suggested that immunological tolerance and steroid mediated growth led to this exacerbation during pregnancy 2 . In a population based study; Haas et al. reported that the number of meningiomas, acoustic neuromas, and primary malignant intracranial neoplasms diagnosed during pregnancy was less than expected with the ratio of observed/expected tumours associated with pregnancy to be 0.38 3 . In 1988, Simon 4 postulated a theory to predict the prevalence of brain tumours in pregnant patients by using the intersection of the probability of being pregnant at any given time with the probability of having a brain tumour at a specific age and sex. Based on this theory the author calculated that in the USA there are about 89 pregnant women per year that also have brain tumours. Brain tumours in pregnant patients impose a unique risk to both the foetus and mother. There are no previous studies that proposed any guidelines for the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours. The aim of this case series is to characterize the current perioperative management of pregnant patients with brain tumours and to suggest guidelines for the proper anaesthetic management. Methods Information on pregnant patients diagnosed with brain tumours that underwent CS and/or brain tumour resection from May 2003 to June 2008 was obtained from the Department of General Anaesthesia and the Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumour & Neuro-Oncology Centre (BBTC) IRB-approved databases at the Cleveland Clinic in OH, USA. Patients were managed by the Departments of Neurosurgery, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Anaesthesiology and BBTC. We used the Anaesthesia Record Keeping System (ARKS) to obtain the electronic record of the anaesthetic management. Additional data from the patients’ electronic and paper charts were used to complete the pre- and post-operative patient information. Results Five pregnant patients presented with brain tumours during their pregnancy. An additional two patients had their diagnosis of brain tumours made in the immediate postpartum period. Diagnoses ( Table 1 ) included meningioma (1 patient) and glioma (6 patients). The mean age was 34.5 years (range 29–40 years) and parity was 0 (2 patients), 1 (1 patient), and >2 (4 patients). More than half of the patients (57%) underwent CS with craniotomy performed, on average, 45 days after the CS (range: 2–90 days). Two patients were diagnosed with a brain tumour during pregnancy and had a craniotomy ( Table 2 ). All our patients were managed by general anaesthesia or monitored anaesthesia care (MAC). Inhalational anaesthetic agents (isoflurane and desflurane) were used under 1-minimal alveolar concentration for the maintenance of anaesthesia. Four drugs were used in our patients for both induction and maintenance of anaesthesia; propofol in 2 pregnant patients, remifentanil in 2 pregnant patients and alfentanil in one patient. Foetal heart rate monitoring was applied in one patient receiving MAC for an “awake” craniotomy. Rapid sequence induction was not universally applied. Four cases had general anaesthesia and used rocuronium as a muscle relaxant to facilitate endotracheal intubation. There were no major intraoperative events ( Table 1 and Table 3 ). The neonatal outcomes of the six patients with elective or emergent delivery were six viable infants with normal Apgar scores. Pregnancy was terminated in the 7 th patient. There was neither operative mortality nor significant sustained morbidity in this series. One patient suffered a pulmonary embolus in the postoperative period. Table 1. Anaesthetic techniques used for brain tumour resection at the Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (2003–2008). Case Anaesthesia technique Anaesthesia induction Anaesthesia maintenance Postoperative events Pathology 1 General Propofol/fentanyl succinylcholine Isoflurane Pulmonary Embolism Tentorial meningioma 2 General Propofol/fentanyl Rocuronium Desflurane-remifentanil Seizures Recurrent anaplastic glioma 3 General Thiopental/fentanyl Rocuronium Isoflurane-remifentanil Medical termination of pregnancy Anaplastic glioma 4 Awake craniotomy Propofol/alfentanil Propofol/alfentanil Deceased 16 months after craniotomy Glioma 5 Awake craniotomy Propofol/ dexmedetomidine Propofol/ dexmedetomidine Expressive aphasia Low grade glioma 6 Awake craniotomy Propofol/ dexmedetomidine Propofol/ dexmedetomidine Mild aphasia Low grade glioma 7 General Propofol/fentanyl succinylcholine Isoflurane-remifentanil Deceased 36 months after craniotomy Glioblastoma multiforme *FHR: Foetal Heart Rate Table 2. Preoperative information of pregnant patients with brain tumours at the Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (2003–2008). Case Age Gestational age at the time of diagnosis (weeks) Preoperative anticonvulsant medications CS followed by tumour excision Time after delivery for craniotomy (days) Gestational age at craniotomy (weeks) Presentation Size and tumour localization Newborn condition 1 37 33 Lorazepam Yes 2 33 Increased ICP*, headache Right Temporal 6 × 4.5 cm Normal Apgar scores 2 36 36 Lorazepam No Concomitant craniotomy and C-section N/A Increased ICP, headache Left Frontal 5 × 4 cm Normal Apgar scores 3 29 6 Phenytoin No Craniotomy during pregnancy 12 Seizures Left Frontal 5.9 × 3.3 cm - 4 40 18 - No Craniotomy during pregnancy 22 Seizures Left Frontal 2.4 × 2.2 cm Normal Apgar scores, Perioperative FHR* monitoring 5 30 18 - Yes 30 N/A Seizures Left Frontal 7.5 × 4.5 cm Normal Apgar scores 6 34 Postpartum- 1 week - Yes 60 N/A Seizures Right frontal 6.1 × 4.7 cm Normal Apgar scores 7 36 Post-partum – 3 weeks Phenytoin Yes 90 (pregnancy was terminated) N/A Seizures and focal signs Right frontal 2.8 × 2.3 cm Normal Apgar scores *ICP: Intra-Cranial Pressure Table 3. Intraoperative management for brain tumour resection at the Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (2003–2008). Case Intraoperative hypotension *EBL (ml) Use of colloids (ml) Total intravenous fluids (ml) Use of furosemide Urine output (ml) Highest BP (mmHg) **ETCO2 range (mmHg) 1 Yes 2200 1000 7500 Yes 2760 150/100 25–40 2 Yes 100 0 1800 No 790 140/80 22–43 3 Yes 1000 1000 4700 Yes 1700 150/80 26–38 4 Yes 500 0 5600 No 3700 120/70 26–34 5 No 100 0 4500 No 4400 170/90 N/A 6 No 400 0 4000 No 1045 160/100 20–30 7 No 100 0 3400 No 1800 140/60 22–36 *EBL: Estimated Blood Loss ** ETCO2: End Tidal CO2 Discussion Brain tumours tend to increase in size during pregnancy due to several factors such as fluid retention, increased blood volume and hormonal changes and therefore may be diagnosed earlier 5 . The decision to proceed with neurosurgery during pregnancy depends on the site, size, type of tumour, neurological signs and symptoms, age of the foetus, and the patient’s wishes 6 , 7 . There are no guidelines for the management of intracranial tumours in pregnant women. A possible algorithm to follow is shown in Figure 1 (modified from Tewari et al. 1 ). Figure 1. Algorithm for management of brain tumours in pregnant women. Management issues Corticosteroids have been recommended as they are safe in pregnancy, promote foetal lung maturity and reduce cerebral oedemas 1 . During the first and early second trimesters, if the patient is stable, it is acceptable to permit pregnancy to proceed into the early second trimester and surgery can then be performed at this time. It is also possible to administer radiotherapy, radio-surgery and image guided surgery beyond the first trimester. If the patient is unstable, undergoing an urgent neurosurgery is recommended 1 . At the end of the second trimester; in stable patients, proceed with pregnancy with close observation. But if the patient has a worsening neurological status; radiotherapy can be used to delay surgery. If the patient is unstable and shows symptoms of impending herniation, it is recommended to use general anaesthesia to deliver the baby by CS which is followed by surgical decompression 1 . At term; in a stable patient, induction of vaginal delivery is permitted 8 . A shortened second stage can be achieved with epidural anaesthesia 9 . CS should only be performed for accepted indications as it has been shown that CS does not seem to provide any advantage over vaginal delivery in protecting against increased intracranial pressure. In unstable patients, perform, as above, CS under general anaesthesia, followed by surgical decompression 1 . Mannitol and hypocapnia were avoided in our patients to prevent foetal dehydration and cerebral ischemia/hypoxia, respectively. General anaesthesia can be safe in pregnant patients with intracranial tumours. Tracheal intubation is very important as it allows maternal hyperventilation thereby controlling raised intracranial pressure 10 . Patients should be pre-medicated with ranitidine 50 mg I.V. to protect the patient against possible vomiting and aspiration. Propofol was used in 2 pregnant patients without producing any side effects. The main side effect is that it has a relaxing effect on the gravid uterus 11 . It is still controversial whether its use is safe with newborns. Bacon et al. did not report any adverse effects of propofol in newborns after emergency CS 12 while another study reported seizure, ataxia, and hallucinations after prolonged propofol anaesthesia for more than 6 hours 13 . Meanwhile, isoflurane is known to produce many adverse effects on the foetus 4 , 5 . It was used in one of our pregnant patients but our records did not show any adverse effects. Desflurane was used in one of our patients with no complications. But the neurotoxicity of desflurane and sevoflurane is still a controversial issue 16 . Remifentanil was used in 2 pregnant patients without producing any adverse effects; this may be explained by the fact that it has a unique metabolism by plasma and tissue esterases and a context-sensitive half-life of 3 to 4 min, independent of the duration of infusion 17 . One concern is that the transfer of opioids, such as remifentanil, across the placenta may lead to neonatal depression. However, remifentanil can be metabolized and redistributed to both the mother and the foetus rapidly 18 . Remifentanil has opioid properties that allow both control of the intraoperative stress response and a more rapid recovery compared to other opioids. Because of its metabolism and short duration of action, remifentanil is therefore considered to be safe and effective for general anaesthesia for emergency CS in patients with neurological risk factors 19 . Clinically relevant concentrations of remifentanil induce rapid, persistent increases in NMDA-induced ion currents. Since NMDA-receptor blockade during a critical stage in brain development leads to depression of neuronal activity and as such is known to initiate the apoptotic cell death cascade in immature neurons, we suggest that remifentanil may be safe for the developing brain. In addition, remifentanil is known to offer a neuron-protective effect in cases of opioid induced hyperalgesia or tolerance 20 . Dexmedetomidine use is recommended in pregnant patients 21 . Possible medications for cases of brain tumours during pregnancy not used in this case series In the following paragraphs we will discuss drugs that were not used in our study but have been investigated before. There are no human trials examining the effects of nitrous oxide on neuronal structure and neurocognitive performance in young children. Some case studies showed that the exposure of neonates to nitrous oxide in utero during the third trimester or during CS can result in transient neurological sequelae 22 . Although sevoflurane is one of the most prevalent volatile anaesthetics, a recent study has suggested that it can cause epileptic seizure activity, neurotoxicity, and both acute and chronic impairment in synaptic plasticity in neonatal rats 16 . Oxytocin has been used in patients with intracranial tumours without any adverse effects. Ergotamine can cause hypertensive responses, which may increase the intracranial cranial pressure and can lead to haemorrhage. It should be avoided in pregnant women with brain tumours 3 . Dexamethasone has been traditionally used to reduce brain oedema. It may be safe to use it in an acute setting but its chronic use may be harmful to the foetus as it may cause hypoadrenalism. Weighting the risks and benefits for treating seizures with anticonvulsants; it is recommended to use them in this setting to avoid seizures that may lead to maternal and foetal hypoxia and acidosis 23 . Several studies investigated the mechanism of anaesthesia-induced neurotoxicity. Previous reports suggested depression of neuronal activity due to anaesthesia induced GABA A receptor activation and NMDA receptor blockade during a critical stage in brain development 20 . Several adjuvants, such as estradiol, pilocarpine, melatonin and dexmedetomidine, have been identified in animal studies to ameliorate anaesthesia induced neurodegeneration 24 – 26 . It is still controversial whether etomidate is neurotoxic or not. There is evidence that the rarely used anaesthetic, xenon, in clinical doses does not have neurodegenerative effects and may be neuroprotective 27 . A recent study showed that the administration of lithium significantly increased the activation of a neuroprotective pathway in the hippocampus. Further studies and human trials are necessary to fully investigate the beneficial effects of lithium in the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours 28 . Conclusion Management of brain tumours in pregnant women is mainly reliant on case reports and the doctor’s personal experience. Therefore, close communication between the neurosurgeon, neuroanaesthetist, obstetrician and the patient is crucial. Good knowledge of the variable anesthetic agents and their effects on the fetus is very important in managing those patients. Author contributions Alaa A Abd-Elsayed: designed, analyzed, interpreted data and wrote the manuscript. Jose Diaz Gomez: designed, analyzed and interpreted data. Gene H Barnett: designed the study and drafted the article. Andrea Kurz: interpreted data and drafted the article. Maria Inton-Santos: interpreted data and drafted the article. Sabri Barsoum: designed the study and drafted the article. Rafi Avistian: interpreted data and drafted the article. Zeyd Ebrahim: designed the study and drafted the article. Vesna J Todorovic: designed the study and drafted the article. Ehab Farag: substantial contribution to conception and design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data. All authors approved the final manuscript for publication. Competing interests All authors declare that there are no competing interests. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Faculty Opinions recommended References 1. Tewari KS, Cappuccini F, Asrat T, et al. : Obstetric emergencies precipitated by malignant brain tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 182 (5): 1215–21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 2. Goldberg M, Rappaport ZH: Neurosurgical, obstetric and endocrine aspects of meningioma during pregnancy. Isr J Med Sci. 1987; 23 (7): 825–8. PubMed Abstract 3. Haas JF, Janisch W, Staneczek W: Newly diagnosed primary intracranial neoplasms in pregnant women: a population-based assessment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1986; 49 (8): 874–80. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 4. Simon RH: Brain tumors in pregnancy. Semin Neurol. 1988; 8 (3): 214–21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 5. Wlody D: Neurosurgery in the pregnant patient. Newfield P, Cottrell J, editors. Philadelphia: WW Lippincott; 1999. 6. Chang L, Looi-Lyons L, Bartosik L, et al. : Anesthesia for cesarean section in two patients with brain tumours. Can J Anaesth. 1999; 46 (1): 61–5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 7. Korula G, Farling P: Anesthetic management for a combined Cesarean section and posterior fossa craniectomy. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 1998; 10 (1): 30–3. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 8. Bayram Cirak N, Memduh K, Kadir T: Neurosurgical procedures in pregnancy. Acta Chir Brasil. 2003; 18 : 5–9. Publisher Full Text 9. Grocott HP, Mutch WA: Epidural anesthesia and acutely increased intracranial pressure. Lumbar epidural space hydrodynamics in a porcine model. Anesthesiology. 1996; 85 (5): 1086–91. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 10. Giannini A, Bricchi M: Posterior fossa surgery in the sitting position in a pregnant patient with cerebellopontine angle meningioma. Br J Anaesth. 1999; 82 (6): 941–4. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 11. Lee TL, Adaikan PG, Lau LC, et al. : Effects of propofol on gravid human uterine muscle. J Anesthesia. 1997; 11 (1): 71–4. Publisher Full Text 12. Bacon RC, Razis PA: The effect of propofol sedation in pregnancy on neonatal condition. Anaesthesia. 1994; 49 (12): 1058–60. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 13. Bendiksen A, Larsen LM: Convulsions, ataxia and hallucinations following propofol. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1998; 42 (6): 739–41. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 14. Hughes J, Leach HJ, Choonara I: Hallucinations on withdrawal of isoflurane used as sedation. Acta Paediatr. 1993; 82 (10): 885–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 15. Arnold JH, Truog RD, Rice SA: Prolonged administration of isoflurane to pediatric patients during mechanical ventilation. Anesth Analg. 1993; 76 (3): 520–6. PubMed Abstract 16. Edwards DA, Shah HP, Cao W, et al. : Bumetanide alleviates epileptogenic and neurotoxic effects of sevoflurane in neonatal rat brain. Anesthesiology. 2010; 112 (3): 567–75. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 17. Loop T, Priebe HJ: Recovery after anesthesia with remifentanil combined with propofol, desflurane, or sevoflurane for otorhinolaryngeal surgery. Anesth Analg. 2000; 91 (1): 123–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Michelsen LG, Hug CC Jr: The pharmacokinetics of remifentanil. J Clin Anesth. 1996; 8 (8): 679–82. PubMed Abstract 19. Ross AK, Davis PJ, Dear Gd GL, et al. : Pharmacokinetics of remifentanil in anesthetized pediatric patients undergoing elective surgery or diagnostic procedures. Anesth Analg. 2001; 93 (6): 1393–401, table of contents. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 20. Jevtovic-Todorovic V: General anesthetics and the developing brain: friends or foes? J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2005; 17 (4): 204–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 21. Souza KM, Anzoategui LC, Pedroso WC, et al. : [Dexmedetomidine in general anesthesia for surgical treatment of cerebral aneurysm in pregnant patient with specific hypertensive disease of pregnancy: case report]. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2005; 55 (2): 212–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 22. Todd MM, Warner DS, Sokoll MD, et al. : A prospective, comparative trial of three anesthetics for elective supratentorial craniotomy. Propofol/fentanyl, isoflurane/nitrous oxide, and fentanyl/nitrous oxide. Anesthesiology. 1993; 78 (6): 1005–20. PubMed Abstract 23. McCarroll CP, Paxton LD, Elliott P, et al. : Use of remifentanil in a patient with peripartum cardiomyopathy requiring Caesarean section. Br J Anaesth. 2001; 86 (1): 135–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 24. Gerstner T, Demirakca S, Demirakca T, et al. : Relevance of phenobarbitalinduced neuronal apoptosis. Psychomotor development of 8 to 14 year olds after neonatal phenobarbital treatment. Monatsschr Kinderheilkund. 2005; 153 : 1174–81. Publisher Full Text 25. Olney J, Wang H, Qin Y, et al. : Pilocarpine pretreatment reduces neuroapoptosis induced by midazolam or isoflurane in infant mouse brain. Atlanta, GA2006 Contract No. Program No. 286.15. 26. Yon JH, Carter LB, Reiter RJ, et al. : Melatonin reduces the severity of anesthesia-induced apoptotic neurodegeneration in the developing rat brain. Neurobiol Dis. 2006; 21 (3): 522–30. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 27. Eishima K: The effects of obstetric conditions on neonatal behaviour in Japanese infants. Early Hum Dev. 1992; 28 (3): 253–63. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 28. Tajes M, Yeste-Velasco M, Zhu X, et al. : Activation of Akt by lithium: pro-survival pathways in aging. Mech Ageing Dev. 2009; 130 (4): 253–61. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 21 Mar 2013 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 2 Department of Outcomes Research, Anesthesia Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 3 Department of General Anesthesia, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 4 Neurological Surgery and Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor & Neuro-Oncology Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 5 Obstetrics & Gynecology Anesthesia, Hillcrest Hospital, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA 6 Anesthesiology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22093, USA Competing interests All authors declare that there are no competing interests. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 11 Dec 2013, 2:92 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v2 version 1 Published: 21 Mar 2013, 2:92 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v1 Copyright © 2013 Abd-Elsayed AA et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Abd-Elsayed AA, Díaz-Gómez J, Barnett GH et al. A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-92.v2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 11 Dec 2013 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Weiniger CF. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r3032 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-3032 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 08 Jan 2014 Carolyn F Weiniger , Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Hadassah-University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r3032 This paper presents a small case series of pregnant women undergoing intracranial surgery, in addition to two postpartum neurosurgical patients. The paper is now much improved for clarity regarding patients who were actually pregnant during the surgery, and provides a ... Continue reading READ ALL This paper presents a small case series of pregnant women undergoing intracranial surgery, in addition to two postpartum neurosurgical patients. The paper is now much improved for clarity regarding patients who were actually pregnant during the surgery, and provides a short review of possible anesthetic management strategies for these patients. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Weiniger CF. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r3032 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-3032 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Paech MJ. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r2792 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-2792 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 18 Dec 2013 Michael James Paech , School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r2792 I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading READ ALL Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Paech MJ. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r2792 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-2792 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 21 Mar 2013 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Weiniger CF. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1899 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1899 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 24 Oct 2013 Carolyn F Weiniger , Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Hadassah-University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1899 The case series reports brain tumors and cesarean delivery (CD) over a five year period in Cleveland Clinics, Ohio. The stated aim was to elucidate management suggestions from previously performed cases in their institution. The case series includes seven patients; 5 ... Continue reading READ ALL The case series reports brain tumors and cesarean delivery (CD) over a five year period in Cleveland Clinics, Ohio. The stated aim was to elucidate management suggestions from previously performed cases in their institution. The case series includes seven patients; 5 with preCD and 2 with postCD diagnosis. The results state that "over half patients underwent CD with craniotomy up to 45 days post CD". Only one woman had craniotomy during pregnancy. Tables 1 and 2 somewhat clarify this confusing information. The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases. Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. Three patients, including one at 22 weeks gestation and two postCD had awake craniotomys. The authors report that fetal monitoring was used in only one of the awake craniotomy patients. It is my understanding that the other two had already delivered at time of craniotomy. The stated study aim was to provide management suggestions for anesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumors. I assumed this meant management for the CD. There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant. The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD? Their tumor was discovered 1 and 3 weeks postpartum. The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Weiniger CF. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1899 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1899 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table ... Continue reading We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases " We have changed this to two patients, as the third case had both managed together. " Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. " We wanted to show the outcomes of all pregnancies regardless of the final management, and we think it is important to mention the fetal outcome. " There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant " We agree with the reviewer - we still think it is important to have this table, but maybe we can change the title to "Intraoperative management". "The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD?" That is a very good point. We wanted to include the algorithm as part of our discussion, as it serves very well to help people managing their cases with the same disease. Our article mainly carries the message of what we did and what can be done better. " The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. " We agree with the reviewer, and have changed this in the manuscript. We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases " We have changed this to two patients, as the third case had both managed together. " Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. " We wanted to show the outcomes of all pregnancies regardless of the final management, and we think it is important to mention the fetal outcome. " There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant " We agree with the reviewer - we still think it is important to have this table, but maybe we can change the title to "Intraoperative management". "The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD?" That is a very good point. We wanted to include the algorithm as part of our discussion, as it serves very well to help people managing their cases with the same disease. Our article mainly carries the message of what we did and what can be done better. " The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. " We agree with the reviewer, and have changed this in the manuscript. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table ... Continue reading We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases " We have changed this to two patients, as the third case had both managed together. " Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. " We wanted to show the outcomes of all pregnancies regardless of the final management, and we think it is important to mention the fetal outcome. " There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant " We agree with the reviewer - we still think it is important to have this table, but maybe we can change the title to "Intraoperative management". "The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD?" That is a very good point. We wanted to include the algorithm as part of our discussion, as it serves very well to help people managing their cases with the same disease. Our article mainly carries the message of what we did and what can be done better. " The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. " We agree with the reviewer, and have changed this in the manuscript. We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases " We have changed this to two patients, as the third case had both managed together. " Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. " We wanted to show the outcomes of all pregnancies regardless of the final management, and we think it is important to mention the fetal outcome. " There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant " We agree with the reviewer - we still think it is important to have this table, but maybe we can change the title to "Intraoperative management". "The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD?" That is a very good point. We wanted to include the algorithm as part of our discussion, as it serves very well to help people managing their cases with the same disease. Our article mainly carries the message of what we did and what can be done better. " The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. " We agree with the reviewer, and have changed this in the manuscript. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Sumikura H. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1900 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1900 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 07 Oct 2013 Hiroyuki Sumikura , Department of Obstetric Anesthesia, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1900 I read this report with interest, as I have just experienced a case of cesarean section with a brain tumor. I wondered if spinal anesthesia was contraindicated for these patients, hence, if the author could add some discussion about this ... Continue reading READ ALL I read this report with interest, as I have just experienced a case of cesarean section with a brain tumor. I wondered if spinal anesthesia was contraindicated for these patients, hence, if the author could add some discussion about this topic it would be greatly appreciated. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Sumikura H. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1900 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1900 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of ... Continue reading This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of controversy that really needs a full another manuscript to discuss. We focused on the good drugs and agents to use and not the technique of management. This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of controversy that really needs a full another manuscript to discuss. We focused on the good drugs and agents to use and not the technique of management. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of ... Continue reading This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of controversy that really needs a full another manuscript to discuss. We focused on the good drugs and agents to use and not the technique of management. This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of controversy that really needs a full another manuscript to discuss. We focused on the good drugs and agents to use and not the technique of management. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Paech MJ. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1393 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1393 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Aug 2013 Michael James Paech , School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1393 There is not much information about modern management of cerebral tumours during pregnancy, so this paper is of some interest despite the small number of cases. Abstract This draws a conclusion and makes general recommendations– yet there was no ... Continue reading READ ALL There is not much information about modern management of cerebral tumours during pregnancy, so this paper is of some interest despite the small number of cases. Abstract This draws a conclusion and makes general recommendations– yet there was no related discussion within the Discussion section of the body of the paper. It is inappropriate anyway to draw conclusions based on a small retrospective case series, so this needs revision. After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper ie. a more detailed description of cases and discussion of the drugs used for general anaesthesia. Introduction This reads well and is informative. I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling. Guidelines should be evidence-based, or in the absence of reasonable evidence at least consensus based, from a group of experts. I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases – perhaps the authors should suggest a plan of obstetric and neurosurgical management. Results “Four patients (57%) underwent …” Please replace “case” with “patient’. Remifentanil and alfentanil are misspelt in several places. Table 2 legend - change to “Intracranial pressure”. Correct Table 1 heading to “Postoperative events”. Delete “Only” from the last sentence. Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2, because Table 1 describes several patients in whom tumour resection was much later than delivery, and Table 2 has the obstetric data. The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS, which becomes a source of confusion when you later discuss drugs and their effects on the developing brain etc. Can this be added? Discussion A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA. Regional block may be appropriate (and preferred by the patient) for CS if there is no evidence of raised intracranial pressure or recent seizures – in this series all patients had increased ICP or seizures. A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful. Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues. Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention. ‘Motherhood’ statements such as “general anaesthesia is safe to be used with intracranial tumours” should be removed. The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation. The potential neurotoxicity is not mentioned, yet later the volatiles are implicated and other drugs considered. This area of science is very interesting but no clinical conclusions have been drawn as yet, and I think it has been over-emphasised throughout the author's Discussion, to the detriment of clinical studies and information about the implications of drugs during neurosurgery. In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information. The evidence condemning isoflurane is not supported by the references, which are paediatric case reports rather than fetal exposure. Few would consider isoflurane unacceptable, despite not being ideal; nor would desflurane or sevoflurane be avoided. References after 17 are muddled and do not apply to the text. This needs full review. In addition there are some odd choices of reference – e.g. the case report by McCarroll on remifentanil and peripartum cardiomyopathy is used to justify a comment about anticonvulsants, and ergometrine is discussed using a reference about craniotomy (or – all perhaps the McCarroll case? – but this would still be inappropriate). Again, suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. It would make more sense to discuss other drugs, some of which were surely used in the patients, in a more logical sequence (no information provided about GA technique for CS, but presumably oxytocin must have been used, possibly also nitrous oxide?). A restructure of the Discussion section with different headings should be considered. Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Paech MJ. Reviewer Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1393 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1393 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the ... Continue reading " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling" The spelling of "fetus" was suggested by the journal. " I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases " We have discussed the evidence from the literature. Having 7 cases from one institute with pregnant patients with brain tumors is a reasonable number, and we are not aware of any other institutions who have published in this topic. It is a rare condition and not that common. " Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2 " Table 2 is already busy, but we will be happy to do this if okay with the journal format. " The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS " We think this is not relevant to the topic we wanted to discuss. We have corrected the manuscript by changing the number of patients to the pregnant patients who had the tumor resection during pregnancy, to make sure it is relevant to the discussion of the effects of variable anesthetics on the developing fetus. " A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA " We just described what was done, multiple anesthesiologists managed our patients and each did it according to his beliefs and practice. We did not state we did the best management, as there are not clear guidelines for the management. And this is the message - we need to have some guidelines for managing these patients. " A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful " It is always done using external monitoring. " Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues " We are not sure to what correction the referee refers. " Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention " These are already mentioned in the discussion section. " The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation " We have modified the conclusion. Thiopentone is not widely used in our insitute. " In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information " This has been mentioned in our discussion. " ...suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. " There has not been much published on these topics, and we quoted the case reports as this is what has been published. " Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series " We have changed the conclusion. We have addressed and corrected the wordings advised by the referee. The issue with the references has also been checked. " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling" The spelling of "fetus" was suggested by the journal. " I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases " We have discussed the evidence from the literature. Having 7 cases from one institute with pregnant patients with brain tumors is a reasonable number, and we are not aware of any other institutions who have published in this topic. It is a rare condition and not that common. " Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2 " Table 2 is already busy, but we will be happy to do this if okay with the journal format. " The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS " We think this is not relevant to the topic we wanted to discuss. We have corrected the manuscript by changing the number of patients to the pregnant patients who had the tumor resection during pregnancy, to make sure it is relevant to the discussion of the effects of variable anesthetics on the developing fetus. " A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA " We just described what was done, multiple anesthesiologists managed our patients and each did it according to his beliefs and practice. We did not state we did the best management, as there are not clear guidelines for the management. And this is the message - we need to have some guidelines for managing these patients. " A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful " It is always done using external monitoring. " Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues " We are not sure to what correction the referee refers. " Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention " These are already mentioned in the discussion section. " The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation " We have modified the conclusion. Thiopentone is not widely used in our insitute. " In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information " This has been mentioned in our discussion. " ...suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. " There has not been much published on these topics, and we quoted the case reports as this is what has been published. " Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series " We have changed the conclusion. We have addressed and corrected the wordings advised by the referee. The issue with the references has also been checked. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed , Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA 11 Dec 2013 Author Response " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the ... Continue reading " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling" The spelling of "fetus" was suggested by the journal. " I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases " We have discussed the evidence from the literature. Having 7 cases from one institute with pregnant patients with brain tumors is a reasonable number, and we are not aware of any other institutions who have published in this topic. It is a rare condition and not that common. " Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2 " Table 2 is already busy, but we will be happy to do this if okay with the journal format. " The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS " We think this is not relevant to the topic we wanted to discuss. We have corrected the manuscript by changing the number of patients to the pregnant patients who had the tumor resection during pregnancy, to make sure it is relevant to the discussion of the effects of variable anesthetics on the developing fetus. " A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA " We just described what was done, multiple anesthesiologists managed our patients and each did it according to his beliefs and practice. We did not state we did the best management, as there are not clear guidelines for the management. And this is the message - we need to have some guidelines for managing these patients. " A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful " It is always done using external monitoring. " Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues " We are not sure to what correction the referee refers. " Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention " These are already mentioned in the discussion section. " The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation " We have modified the conclusion. Thiopentone is not widely used in our insitute. " In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information " This has been mentioned in our discussion. " ...suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. " There has not been much published on these topics, and we quoted the case reports as this is what has been published. " Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series " We have changed the conclusion. We have addressed and corrected the wordings advised by the referee. The issue with the references has also been checked. " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling" The spelling of "fetus" was suggested by the journal. " I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases " We have discussed the evidence from the literature. Having 7 cases from one institute with pregnant patients with brain tumors is a reasonable number, and we are not aware of any other institutions who have published in this topic. It is a rare condition and not that common. " Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2 " Table 2 is already busy, but we will be happy to do this if okay with the journal format. " The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS " We think this is not relevant to the topic we wanted to discuss. We have corrected the manuscript by changing the number of patients to the pregnant patients who had the tumor resection during pregnancy, to make sure it is relevant to the discussion of the effects of variable anesthetics on the developing fetus. " A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA " We just described what was done, multiple anesthesiologists managed our patients and each did it according to his beliefs and practice. We did not state we did the best management, as there are not clear guidelines for the management. And this is the message - we need to have some guidelines for managing these patients. " A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful " It is always done using external monitoring. " Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues " We are not sure to what correction the referee refers. " Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention " These are already mentioned in the discussion section. " The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation " We have modified the conclusion. Thiopentone is not widely used in our insitute. " In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information " This has been mentioned in our discussion. " ...suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. " There has not been much published on these topics, and we quoted the case reports as this is what has been published. " Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series " We have changed the conclusion. We have addressed and corrected the wordings advised by the referee. The issue with the references has also been checked. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 21 Mar 2013 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 2 (revision) 11 Dec 13 read read Version 1 21 Mar 13 read read read Michael James Paech , University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia Hiroyuki Sumikura , National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan Carolyn F Weiniger , Hadassah-University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2014 Weiniger C. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 08 Jan 2014 | for Version 2 Carolyn F Weiniger , Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Hadassah-University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel 0 Views copyright © 2014 Weiniger C. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This paper presents a small case series of pregnant women undergoing intracranial surgery, in addition to two postpartum neurosurgical patients. The paper is now much improved for clarity regarding patients who were actually pregnant during the surgery, and provides a short review of possible anesthetic management strategies for these patients. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Weiniger CF. Peer Review Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r3032) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-3032 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2013 Paech M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 18 Dec 2013 | for Version 2 Michael James Paech , School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2013 Paech M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Paech MJ. Peer Review Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3227.r2792) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2#referee-response-2792 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2013 Weiniger C. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 24 Oct 2013 | for Version 1 Carolyn F Weiniger , Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Hadassah-University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel 0 Views copyright © 2013 Weiniger C. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The case series reports brain tumors and cesarean delivery (CD) over a five year period in Cleveland Clinics, Ohio. The stated aim was to elucidate management suggestions from previously performed cases in their institution. The case series includes seven patients; 5 with preCD and 2 with postCD diagnosis. The results state that "over half patients underwent CD with craniotomy up to 45 days post CD". Only one woman had craniotomy during pregnancy. Tables 1 and 2 somewhat clarify this confusing information. The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases. Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. Three patients, including one at 22 weeks gestation and two postCD had awake craniotomys. The authors report that fetal monitoring was used in only one of the awake craniotomy patients. It is my understanding that the other two had already delivered at time of craniotomy. The stated study aim was to provide management suggestions for anesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumors. I assumed this meant management for the CD. There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant. The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD? Their tumor was discovered 1 and 3 weeks postpartum. The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA We would like to thank the reviewer for her valid points. " The authors report in the results that one patient had tumor diagnosed during pregnancy and had peripartum craniotomy, yet table 2 reports three such cases " We have changed this to two patients, as the third case had both managed together. " Table 1 reports the anesthesia drugs used for craniotomy surgery in the seven patients. Since only 3 patients had craniotomy with CD, it is not clear why Apgar scores are reported here for the patients who had post CD craniotomy. " We wanted to show the outcomes of all pregnancies regardless of the final management, and we think it is important to mention the fetal outcome. " There are few details regarding the CD surgery, and four patients undergoing craniotomy were no longer pregnant at time of the craniotomy. Therefore table 3 also doesn't make sense- it is titled "management of pregnant patients for brain tumor resection" - again, four patients are no longer pregnant " We agree with the reviewer - we still think it is important to have this table, but maybe we can change the title to "Intraoperative management". "The authors present an algorithm for delivery of women with brain tumors. I could not find in their results any case of VD, all seemed to have CD. I wonder why the two postpartum diagnosed patients had CD?" That is a very good point. We wanted to include the algorithm as part of our discussion, as it serves very well to help people managing their cases with the same disease. Our article mainly carries the message of what we did and what can be done better. " The authors mention that VD is a delivery option, but their study does not bring new evidence for this. The algorithm combines information from other studies and is quite clear, but I wonder if their series adds to our knowledge. For example, stating that propofol was used in six patients and is controversial with newborns is not relevant for the four women who had craniotomy postpartum. Same goes for isoflurane and later - dexmetotomidine. The literature review of pharmacological agents is nicely presented. However again the conclusion reporting safety of des/iso is not particularly relevant, as some women were not pregnant when the drugs were given. " We agree with the reviewer, and have changed this in the manuscript. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Weiniger CF. Peer Review Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1899) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1899 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2013 Sumikura H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 07 Oct 2013 | for Version 1 Hiroyuki Sumikura , Department of Obstetric Anesthesia, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan 0 Views copyright © 2013 Sumikura H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions I read this report with interest, as I have just experienced a case of cesarean section with a brain tumor. I wondered if spinal anesthesia was contraindicated for these patients, hence, if the author could add some discussion about this topic it would be greatly appreciated. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA This is a very good point mentioned by the reviewer, we just think it is out of the scope of this article, and is a topic with a lot of controversy that really needs a full another manuscript to discuss. We focused on the good drugs and agents to use and not the technique of management. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Sumikura H. Peer Review Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1900) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1900 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2013 Paech M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Aug 2013 | for Version 1 Michael James Paech , School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2013 Paech M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions There is not much information about modern management of cerebral tumours during pregnancy, so this paper is of some interest despite the small number of cases. Abstract This draws a conclusion and makes general recommendations– yet there was no related discussion within the Discussion section of the body of the paper. It is inappropriate anyway to draw conclusions based on a small retrospective case series, so this needs revision. After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper ie. a more detailed description of cases and discussion of the drugs used for general anaesthesia. Introduction This reads well and is informative. I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling. Guidelines should be evidence-based, or in the absence of reasonable evidence at least consensus based, from a group of experts. I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases – perhaps the authors should suggest a plan of obstetric and neurosurgical management. Results “Four patients (57%) underwent …” Please replace “case” with “patient’. Remifentanil and alfentanil are misspelt in several places. Table 2 legend - change to “Intracranial pressure”. Correct Table 1 heading to “Postoperative events”. Delete “Only” from the last sentence. Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2, because Table 1 describes several patients in whom tumour resection was much later than delivery, and Table 2 has the obstetric data. The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS, which becomes a source of confusion when you later discuss drugs and their effects on the developing brain etc. Can this be added? Discussion A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA. Regional block may be appropriate (and preferred by the patient) for CS if there is no evidence of raised intracranial pressure or recent seizures – in this series all patients had increased ICP or seizures. A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful. Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues. Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention. ‘Motherhood’ statements such as “general anaesthesia is safe to be used with intracranial tumours” should be removed. The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation. The potential neurotoxicity is not mentioned, yet later the volatiles are implicated and other drugs considered. This area of science is very interesting but no clinical conclusions have been drawn as yet, and I think it has been over-emphasised throughout the author's Discussion, to the detriment of clinical studies and information about the implications of drugs during neurosurgery. In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information. The evidence condemning isoflurane is not supported by the references, which are paediatric case reports rather than fetal exposure. Few would consider isoflurane unacceptable, despite not being ideal; nor would desflurane or sevoflurane be avoided. References after 17 are muddled and do not apply to the text. This needs full review. In addition there are some odd choices of reference – e.g. the case report by McCarroll on remifentanil and peripartum cardiomyopathy is used to justify a comment about anticonvulsants, and ergometrine is discussed using a reference about craniotomy (or – all perhaps the McCarroll case? – but this would still be inappropriate). Again, suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. It would make more sense to discuss other drugs, some of which were surely used in the patients, in a more logical sequence (no information provided about GA technique for CS, but presumably oxytocin must have been used, possibly also nitrous oxide?). A restructure of the Discussion section with different headings should be considered. Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 11 Dec 2013 Alaa Abd-Elsayed, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA " After describing the cases and the drugs used, I suggest the author indicates what follows next in the paper" We have changed the conclusion as advised by the referee. " I prefer the use of “fetus” and there is a good linguistic argument to be made for this spelling" The spelling of "fetus" was suggested by the journal. " I don’t think it is reasonable to suggest guidelines should come from ‘studies’ or be based on single institution experience with 7 cases " We have discussed the evidence from the literature. Having 7 cases from one institute with pregnant patients with brain tumors is a reasonable number, and we are not aware of any other institutions who have published in this topic. It is a rare condition and not that common. " Neonatal condition would be better placed in Table 2 " Table 2 is already busy, but we will be happy to do this if okay with the journal format. " The GA technique for tumour resection is mentioned but not the GA technique for CS " We think this is not relevant to the topic we wanted to discuss. We have corrected the manuscript by changing the number of patients to the pregnant patients who had the tumor resection during pregnancy, to make sure it is relevant to the discussion of the effects of variable anesthetics on the developing fetus. " A comment should be made about the exclusive use of GA " We just described what was done, multiple anesthesiologists managed our patients and each did it according to his beliefs and practice. We did not state we did the best management, as there are not clear guidelines for the management. And this is the message - we need to have some guidelines for managing these patients. " A comment about the location of fetal monitoring might also be useful " It is always done using external monitoring. " Correct to “cerebral oedema” and “epidural analgesia” in Management Issues " We are not sure to what correction the referee refers. " Preoperative seizure control and the implications of anticonvulsant therapy warrant a mention " These are already mentioned in the discussion section. " The discussion of propofol should be re-focused and expanded a little – this is now widely considered suitable for induction in pregnancy, and the main issues are the dose-response curve compared with thiopentone and the neonatal outcome, rather than uterine relaxation " We have modified the conclusion. Thiopentone is not widely used in our insitute. " In relation to animal neurotoxicity studies, I suggest only drawing comparisons between various drugs and balance these with clinical information " This has been mentioned in our discussion. " ...suggesting that remifentanil is safe for the developing brain is premature if based only on mechanistic action considerations. Likewise use of dexmedetomidine, quoting a single case report! Please discuss mechanisms but don’t generalise. " There has not been much published on these topics, and we quoted the case reports as this is what has been published. " Please do not draw conclusions about safety based on a 7 patient case series " We have changed the conclusion. We have addressed and corrected the wordings advised by the referee. The issue with the references has also been checked. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Paech MJ. Peer Review Report For: A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients with brain tumours [version 2; peer review: 3 approved] . F1000Research 2013, 2 :92 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1231.r1393) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v1#referee-response-1393 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "A case series discussing the anaesthetic...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Abd-Elsayed AA et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92", templates : { twitter : "A case series discussing the anaesthetic management of pregnant.... Abd-Elsayed AA et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/2-92/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/1080/3227") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "3227"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "1696": 0, "1697": 0, "1159": 0, "2792": 25, "1160": 0, "1161": 0, "1898": 0, "1899": 40, "1900": 17, "1901": 0, "1902": 0, "1392": 0, "1393": 21, "1394": 0, "1491": 0, "1395": 0, "2744": 0, "3032": 13, "2745": 0, "2746": 0, "1694": 0, "1695": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "ae962ae1-1ec7-49fc-99a1-0846d415a956"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });