General versus Spinal Anesthesia During Caesarean Section; A Narrative Review

  • Zahid Hussain Khan Professor of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Deputy for Research, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Imam Khomeini Medical Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Negar Eftekhar Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Rafah Sabah Barrak Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords: General anesthesia, Spinal anesthesia, Cesarean section

Abstract

This research is a method review type, comparative study between the effects of General anesthesia versus those of spinal anesthesia during caesarean section on the newborns and the mother undergoing cesarean section. The variables considered in the study included patient family history, patient medical history, status of patient during pregnancy, age of patient, and emergency or planned cesarean. Both general and spinal methods of anesthesia had differing results in multiple aspects and effects both during and after the surgery. However, pros of spinal anesthesia topped those of general anesthesia and is therefore the more favorable method of anesthesia

References

1. Murray E, Mark J. A Guide to effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford: Universiry Press; 2000.
2. Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph K, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ. 2007; 176(4):455-60.
3. Andersen HF, Auster GH, Marx GF, Merkatz IR. Neonatal status in relation to incision intervals, obstetric factors, and anesthesia at cesarean delivery. Am J Perinatol. 1987; 4(04):279-83.
4. Graham D, Russell I. A double-blind assessment of the analgesic sparing effect of intrathecal diamorphine (0.3 mg) with spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section. Int J Obstet Anesth. 1997; 6(4):224-30.
5. Thorp J, Laughon S. Clinical aspects of normal and abnormal labor. Maternal-Fetal Medicine: Principles and Practice 6th ed Philadelphia, Pa: Saunders Elsevier. 2009:453-76.
6. Rosen M. Obstetric anaesthesia and analgesia. Current Opinion in Anesthesiology. 1994;7(3):219-20.
7. Andrews WW, Ramin SM, Maberry MC, Shearer V, Black S, Wallace DH. Effect of type of anesthesia on blood loss at elective repeat cesarean section. Am J Perinatol. 1992; 9(03):197-200.
8. Visalyaputra S, Rodanant O, Somboonviboon W, Tantivitayatan K, Thienthong S, Saengchote W. Spinal versus epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery in severe preeclampsia: a prospective randomized, multicenter study. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(3):862-8.
9. Macarthur A, Riley ET. Obstetric anesthesia controversies: vasopressor choice for postspinal hypotension during cesarean delivery. International anesthesiology clinics. 2007;45(1):115-32.
10. Brownridge P. Spinal anaesthesia in obstetrics. British journal of anaesthesia. 1991;67(5):663.
11. Ng KW, Parsons J, Cyna AM, Middleton P. Spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section. The Cochrane Library. 2004(2).
12. Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, Gibbs CP. Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979–1990. Anesthesiology. 1997;86(2):277-84.
13. Hibbard B, Anderson M, Drife J, Tighe J, Gordon G, Willatts S. Deaths associated with anaesthesia. Report on confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom. 1991;1993:87-102.
14. Ezri T, Szmuk P, Evron S, Geva D, Hagay Z, Katz J. Difficult airway in obstetric anesthesia: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001; 56(10):631-41.
15. Loo C, Dahlgren G, Irestedt L. Neurological complications in obstetric regional anaesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2000; 9(2):99-124.
16. Kararmaz A, Kaya S, Turhanoglu S, Ozyilmaz M. Which administration route of fentanyl better enhances the spread of spinal anaesthesia: intravenous, intrathecal or both? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2003; 47(9):1096-100.
17. Gadsden J, Hart S, Santos AC. Post-cesarean delivery analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(5S):S62-S9.
18. Cardoso MM, Carvalho JC, Amaro AR, Prado AA, Cappelli EL. Small doses of intrathecal morphine combined with systemic diclofenac for postoperative pain control after cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg. 1998;86(3):538-41.
19. Bloom SL, Spong CY, Weiner SJ, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Varner MW, et al. Complications of anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(2):281-7.
20. Ranasinghe J, Steadman J, Toyama T, Lai M. Combined spinal epidural anaesthesia is better than spinal or epidural alone for Caesarean delivery. Br J Anaesth. 2003;91(2):299-300.
21. Choi PT, Galinski SE, Takeuchi L, Lucas S, Tamayo C, Jadad AR. PDPH is a common complication of neuraxial blockade in parturients: a meta-analysis of obstetrical studies. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50(5):460-9.
22. Douglas M, Ward M, Campbell D, Bright S, Merrick P. Factors involved in the incidence of post-dural puncture headache with the 25 gauge Whitacre needle for obstetric anesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth. 1997;6(4):220-3.
23. Morewood GH. A rational approach to the cause, prevention and treatment of postdural puncture headache. CMAJ. 1993;149(8):1087.
24. Smith E, Thorburn J, Duckworth R, Reid J. A comparison of 25 G and 27 G Whitacre needles for caesarean section. Anaesthesia. 1994;49(10):859-62.
25. Hatfalvi BI. Postulated Mechanisms for Postdural Puncture Headache and Review of Laboratory Models. Clinical Experience. Reg Anesth. 1995;20(4):329-36.
26. Sitzman BT, Uncles DR. The effects of needle type, gauge, and tip bend on spinal needle deflection. Anesth Analg. 1996;82(2):297-301.
27. Ahn WS, Bahk JH, Lim YJ, Kim YC. The effect of introducer gauge, design and bevel direction on the deflection of spinal needles. Anaesthesia. 2002;57(10):1007-11.
28. Kopacz DJ, Allen HW. Comparison of needle deviation during regional anesthetic techniques in a laboratory model. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 1995;81(3):630-3.
29. Afolabi BB, Lesi F, Merah NA. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;4.
30. Cope RW. The Woolley and Roe case; Woolley and Roe versus Ministry of Health and others. Anaesthesia. 1954; 9(4):249-70.
31. Kotelko DM, Dailey PA, Shnider SM, Rosen MA, Hughes SC, Brizgys RV. Epidural morphine analgesia after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1984;63(3):409-13.
32. Sprotte G, Schedel R, Pajunk H, Pajunk H. Eine atraumatische Universalkanüle für einzeitige Regionalanaesthesien Klinische Ergebnisse nach sechsjähriger Erprobung bei über 30000 Regionalanaesthesien. Der Anaesthesist. 1987;36(7):104-8.
33. Afolabi BB, Lesi FE. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. The Cochrane Library. 2012; 10:CD004350.
34. Abdallah MW, Elzayyat NS, Abdelhaq MM, Gado AAM. A comparative study of general anesthesia versus combined spinal–epidural anesthesia on the fetus in Cesarean section. Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2014;30(2):155-60.
35. Elgebaly AS, Elhawary T. General anaesthesia versus combined spinal epidural anaesthesia in the presence of mild to moderate pericardial effusion: A study of volunteers undergoing caesarean section. Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2013; 29(1):19-24.
36. Ismail S, Huda A. An observational study of anaesthesia and surgical time in elective caesarean section: spinal compared with general anaesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2009;18(4):352-5.
37. Devroe S, Van de Velde M, Rex S. General anesthesia for caesarean section. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015;28(3):240-6.
38. Martin T, Bell P, Ogunbiyi O. Comparison of general anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section in Antigua and Barbuda. West Indian Med J. 2007;56(4):330-3.
39. Arndt M, Benad G. The risks of anesthesia in obstetric interventions. Anaesthesiol Reanim. 1994;19(4):88-94.
Published
2018-12-29
How to Cite
1.
Khan Z, Eftekhar N, Barrak R. General versus Spinal Anesthesia During Caesarean Section; A Narrative Review. Arch Anesth & Crit Care. 5(1):18-1.
Section
Review Article(s)