A Comparative Study of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Emergency Cesarean Delivery

Abstract

Background: Anesthesia in haste and safety is needed in the case of emergency Cesarean delivery. Spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia are the most common ones with their advantages and disadvantages that affect the maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Aim: To make comparisons between the maternal and neonatal outcomes of spinal and general anesthesia in emergency cesarean delivery.

Methodology: The study setting was the department of Anaesthesiology, Gouri Devi Institute of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Durgapur and the retrospective observational study was conducted on one year basis. A total of a hundred emergency cases of cesarean were examined and half of the patients received spinal anesthesia with the remaining half receiving general anesthesia. Data regarding maternal hemodynamics, intraoperative complications, postoperative outcomes and neonatal APGAR scores were collected and compared using statistics.

Results: Better neonatal outcomes such as increased APGAR scores at 1 and 5 minutes were observed with the use of spinal anesthesia. Nonetheless, hypotension occurred more common in the spinal group (30%). General anesthesia had increased cases of airway complications and reduced neonatal APGAR scores. Mothers who were in the spinal group recovered faster.

Conclusion: Spinal anesthesia is believed to be more beneficial and safer in a situation that requires emergent cesarean section as it is safer despite the close observation that has to be made on the hypotension. In some emergency situations general anesthesia is required.

Keywords: Emergency cesarean section, Spinal anesthesia, General anesthesia, APGAR score, Maternal outcomes, Neonatal outcomes