Epidural use at birth unrelated to autism risk, studies show | News Center

October 2020, Research According to the birth rate in California, epidural use is associated with a 37% increased risk of autism diagnosis in later children. However, this study shows many socio-economic, genetic and medical risks of autism that may be more common among women who choose epidural anesthesia apart from epidural anesthesia. It was widely criticized for not being able to explain the factors. Experts also said that it is biologically unbelievable that epidural anesthesia increases the risk of autism.Published by several expert associations shortly after the publication of the study statement The study states that it did not provide reliable scientific evidence that epidural anesthesia causes autism.

A new study investigated epidural use during childbirth and subsequent diagnosis of autism in Manitoba, Canada. This included 123,175 children born between 2005 and 2016 and tracked until 2019.

“Manitova has these great linked datasets across the population,” said Batwick, who linked the research team to personal medical records, prescriptions, other health-related data, socio-economic information, and information about children. He said he was able to access the information he had provided. Academic achievements. “It’s a lot of special information,” he said.

All children who participated in the study were born by vaginal delivery and had a single birth, not twins or other multiples. Of those studied, 38.2% of children were exposed to epidural anesthesia during labor. The rest wasn’t. Of the children who received epidural anesthesia during labor, 2.1% were later diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, compared with 1.7% who did not receive epidural anesthesia.

Management of social, medical and family factors

However, researchers have since managed factors that may affect the risk of autism. This is a far more factor than previous studies. They included socio-economic factors (mother’s education, marriage status, neighborhood socio-economic levels and receipt of welfare during pregnancy). Mother’s pre-pregnancy medical history (including diabetes, hypertension, anxiety, depression); Pregnant medical conditions; Mother’s smoking, alcohol, use of recreational drugs. Hospitalization of the mother due to mental illness during pregnancy; use of several types of prescription drugs (benzodiazepines, antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs) by the mother. Medical complications of labor; Factors related to the mother’s pregnancy and labor, such as gestation period, whether delivery was induced or enhanced, and whether the foetation is large or distressed during labor.

Epidural anesthesia continues to be an established and effective means of relieving pain during labor.

The researchers also analyzed a pair of siblings whose mother received epidural anesthesia during one birth but not during the other. This comparison provided a way to explain the genetic and familial factors that influence the risk of autism.

After the researchers adjusted all confounding factors, there was no statistically significant difference in autism risk between children whose mother received epidural anesthesia at birth and those who did not. Considering genetic and family-related factors, the differences between the groups were further reduced.

According to Wallwheeler, the team conducted a variety of analyzes and repeatedly found a lack of association between epidural anesthesia and autism. “It really gives us confidence in how solid our results were,” she said.

“Our study has stronger discoveries because it explained the limitations that the first study had,” Batwick said. “Epidural anesthesia is an established and effective means of relieving pain during labor and has several associated benefits.”

The study was also co-authored by Dr. Brian Bateman, MD, the next chair of Stanford University’s Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine. (Bateman is currently responsible for obstetric anesthesia at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.) Other scientists at the University of Manitoba contributed to the study.

This study was funded by the Canadian Institute of Health.