Author(s): Havas F, Orhan Sungur M, Yenign Y, Karadeniz M, Kl M,
Abstract Share this page
Abstract OBJECTIVES: This prospective study aims to compare maternal and neonatal effects of spinal and general anesthesia for elective cesarean section. METHODS: Term parturients receiving routine spinal (Group SA, n=95) or general (Group GA, n=93) anesthesia and standard postoperative analgesia for elective cesarean section were included in this study. Operation time, incision-hysterotomy (TS-H) and hysterotomy-umbilical cord clamping (TH-U) intervals, oxytocine requirement, intraoperative fluids, ephedrine requirement, incidence of hypotension, time to first analgesic requirement (Tanalg), pethidine consumption, adverse events, time to first breastfeeding, oral food intake (TOI), flatulence (TF), defecation (TD), mobilization, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between the groups. Newborn Apgar scores, umbilical venous blood gas analysis, incidence of hypoglycemia, nutritional support, phototherapy and ventilatory support were also analyzed. RESULTS: Spinal anesthesia was associated with longer TS-H and TH-U durations, lower oxytocine requirements, higher incidence of hypotension, increased ephedrine and fluid consumption, and delayed Tanalg. Furthermore, TOI, TF, TD and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in patients given spinal anesthesia when compared with patients given general anesthesia (48h vs. 52 h, respectively; p<0.01). No difference in postoperative analgesic consumption and neonatal outcomes, except 1st min Apgar scores and umbilical blood gas analysis, was detected. CONCLUSION: Spinal anesthesia, when compared to general anesthesia shortens postoperative hospital stay with early return of gastrointestinal functions in elective cesarean section.
This article was published in Agri
and referenced in Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research