Regional versus general anesthesia for cesarean section delivery

  • John Jairo Páez L. Anesthesiology and Resuscitation, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Colombia
  • José Ricardo Navarro V Anesthesiology and Resuscitation, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, Colombia
Keywords: Cesarean section, General anesthesia, Spinal anesthesia, Epidural anesthesia

Abstract

Introduction:There is no standard anesthesia technique for cesarean section. General anesthesia has been associated with higher morbidity-mortality; however, recent studies seem to disagree with such statement.

Objective:Based on a search in the literature, to reflect on the comparative results of regional vs. general anesthesia for C-section considering three aspects: mortality, morbidity and neonatal outcomes.

Methods: Article for reflection. A non-systematic search of the literature on the topic was performed in the Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane and Lilacs databases, using Mesh terms included in the key words.

Results:Although the rates for cesarean sections have been constant, the use of general anesthesia has decreased progressively. Maternal mortality associated to general anesthesia during cesarean section has dropped to practically the same level as regional anesthesia: 1.7 (95% CI, 0.6-4.6). Mortality is lower with regional anesthesia: less bleeding, lower risk of surgical site infection, less post-operative pain. The neonatal outcomes are practically the same.

Conclusion: As long as they are not contraindicated, neuraxial anesthetic techniques are the method of choice for C-section delivery, because they are associated with lower morbidity, though mortality and neonatal outcomes are similar as compared to general anesthesia.

References

1. Navarro JR. Anestesia para cesárea regional vs. Gen Rev Colomb Anestesiol. 1999;27:227-36.

2. Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-Shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, Wagner M. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-113.

3. Rizo A. Partos atendidos por cesárea: análisis de los datos de las encuestas nacionales de demografía y salud de Colombia 1995-2005. Revista EAN. 2009;67:59-74.

4. Tsen LC. Anesthesia for cesarean delivery. In: Chestnut DH, editor. Obstetric anesthesia principles and practice. Philadelphia: Elsevier Inc.; 2009. p. 521.

5. Bucklin BA, Hawkins JL, Anderson JR, Ullrich FA. Obstetric anesthesia workforce survey: twenty-year update. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:645-53.

6. Palanisamy A, Mitani AA, Tsen LC. General anesthesia for cesarean delivery at a tertiary care hospital from 2000 to 2005: a retrospective analysis and 10-year update. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2011;20:10-6.

7. Afolabi BB, Lesi FE, Merah NA. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;4:CD004350.

8. Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, Gibbs CP. Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979-1990. Anesthesiology. 1997;86:277-84.

9. Hawkins JL, Chang J, Palmer SK, Gibbs CP, Callaghan WM. Anesthesia-related maternal mortality in the United States: 1979-2002. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:69-74.

10. Lertakyamanee J, Chinachoti T, Tritrakarn T, Muangkasem J, Somboonnanonda A, Kolatat T. Comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean section: success rate, blood loss and satisfaction from a randomized trial. J Med Assoc Thai. 1999;82:672-80.

11. Hong JY, Jee YS, Yoon HJ, Kim SM. Comparison of general and epidural anesthesia in elective cesarean section for placenta previa totalis: maternal hemodynamics, blood loss and neonatal outcome. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2003;12: 12-6.

12. Dyer RA, Els I, Farbas J, Torr GJ, Schoeman LK, James MF. Prospective, randomized trial comparing general with spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in preeclamptic patients with a nonreassuring fetal heart trace. Anesthesiology. 2003;99:561-9.

13. Tsai PS, Hsu CS, Fan YC, Huang CJ. General anaesthesia is associated with increased risk of surgical site infection after Caesarean delivery compared with neuraxial anaesthesia: a population-based study. Br J Anaesth. 2011;107:757-61.

14. Fassoulaki A, Staikou C, Melemeni A, Kottis G, Petropoulos G. Anaesthesia preference, neuraxial vs general, and outcome after caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;30:818-21.

15. Sener EB, Guldogus F, Karakaya D, Baris S, Kocamanoglu S, Tur A. Comparison of neonatal effects of epidural and general anesthesia for cesarean section. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2003;55:41-5.

16. Petropoulos G, Siristatidis C, Salamalekis E, Creatsas G. Spinal and epidural versus general anesthesia for elective cesarean section at term: effect on the acid-base status of the mother and newborn. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13:260-6.

17. Wallace DH, Leveno KJ, Cunningham FG, Giesecke AH, Shearer VE, Sidawi JE. Randomized comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:193-9.

18. Mancuso A, De Vivo A, Giacobbe A, Priola V, Maggio Savasta L, Guzzo M, De Vivo D, Mancuso A. General versus spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean sections: effects on neonatal short-term outcome. A prospective randomised study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010;23:1114-8.

19. Yegin A, Ertug Z, Yilmaz M, Erman M. The effects of epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia on newborns at cesarean section. Turk J Med Sci. 2003;33:311-4.

20. Kolatat T, Somboonnanonda A, Lertakyamanee J, Chinachot T, Tritrakarn T, Muangkasem J. Effects of general and regional anesthesia on the neonate (a prospective, randomized trial). J Med Assoc Thai. 1999;82:40-5.

21. Korkmaz F, Eksioglu B, Hanci A, Basgul A. Comparison of combined spinal epidural block and general anesthesia for cesarean section. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29 Suppl. 2:77.
How to Cite
1.
Páez L. JJ, Navarro V JR. Regional versus general anesthesia for cesarean section delivery. Colomb. J. Anesthesiol. [Internet]. 2012Jul.1 [cited 2022Jan.20];40(3):203-6. Available from: https://www.revcolanest.com.co/index.php/rca/article/view/406

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Published
2012-07-01
How to Cite
1.
Páez L. JJ, Navarro V JR. Regional versus general anesthesia for cesarean section delivery. Colomb. J. Anesthesiol. [Internet]. 2012Jul.1 [cited 2022Jan.20];40(3):203-6. Available from: https://www.revcolanest.com.co/index.php/rca/article/view/406
Section
Essay

More on this topic