Effect of Anesthesia Methods During Elective Cesareans on Neonates: Ordu Province Example

Year 2021, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 81 - 87, 30.04.2021

Emine Yurdakul Ertürk , Ahmet Gültekin , Yeliz Kaşko Arıcı

https://doi.org/10.19127/mbsjohs.878391

Abstract

Objective: To research the short-term effects on neonates of different anesthesia methods administered for elective cesareans.
Methods: Data obtained from files and electronic medical records of 157 singleton cesarean cases and neonates from January 2018 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed and 6 cases were excluded from the study. A total of 151 cases were divided into general anesthesia-propofol (n=30), spinal (n=100) and general anesthesia-pentothal (n=21) groups.
Results: A total of 151 cesarean cases that meet the inclusion criteria in the date interval of the study were assessed. Of cases, 100 (66%) were in the spinal anesthesia group, 30 (20%) were in the general anesthesia-propofol group and 21 (14%) were in the general anesthesia-pentothal group. There was no significant difference between the study groups in terms of demographic data. The umbilical cord pCO2 value was significantly low in the spinal anesthesia group (43.60±5.52) compared to the general-pentothal group (47.38±5.71). The umbilical cord HCO3 value was lower in the spinal anesthesia group (22.69±1.62) compared to the general-pentothal (23.48±1.53) and general-propofol groups (23.49±1.83). There was a significant variation in postnatal treatment types according to anesthesia method (p=0.012). The rate not requiring treatment was lowest in the general-propofol group (46.7%), while the rate of balloon-valve mask use (46.7%) was highest compared to the other groups. In terms of 5th minute Apgar scores, there was a significant difference between the groups (p=0.024). Patients in the general-propofol group had significantly lower 5th minute Apgar scores compared to patients in the spinal group.
Conclusion: The balloon-valve mask rate was highest for those with propofol general anesthesia. Additionally, it was identified that neonates in both general anesthesia groups had higher neonatal intensive care unit requirements compared to the spinal anesthesia group.

Keywords

Cesarean section, neonatal outcome, pentothal, propofol, spinal anesthesia

References

• 1. 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(4):260-6.
• 2. Sari MA, Kucukguclu S, Ozbilgin S, Gunenc FS, Mercan S, Esen A, et al. Retrospective Evaluation of Anaesthetic Techniques for Caesarean. Turk J Anaesth Reanim. 2015;43(6):373-80.
• 3. Balci C, Toprak D, Sıvacı RG. Evaluation of the effects of general and spinal anesthesia on the mother and newborn in selective cesarean operations. Selcuk Medical J. 2005;21(4):98-103.
• 4. Antoine C, Young BK. Fetal lactic acidosis with epidural anesthesia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;142(1):55-9. 5. Agacayak E, Yavuz M, Tunc SY, Akin G, Ertugrul S, Yildirim ZB, et al. Comparison of Neonatal Outcomes of Elective Caesarean Section Performed with General Anesthesia or Spinal Anesthesia and Non-anesthesia Normal Birth. Dicle Med J 2019;46(2):299-305.
• 6. Kirecci A, Berber H, Bakacak SM, Kalay S. The short-term effect of general and spinal anaesthesia on newborn in elective cesarean deliveries. MEDJ. 2014;29(2):99-103.
• 7. Johnson JWC, Richards DS, Wagaman RA. The case for routine umbilical blood acid–base studies at delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;162(3):621–5.
• 8. Reynolds F, Seed PT. Anaesthesia for Caesarean section and neonatal acid-base status: a meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2005;60(7):636-53.
• 9. Hu L, Pan J, Zhang S, Yu J, He K, Shu S, et al. Propofol in combination with remifentanil for cesarean section: Placental transfer and effect on mothers and newborns at different induction to delivery intervals. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;56(4):521-526.
• 10. Apgar V, Holaday DA, James LS, Princa CE, Wesibrot IM. Comparison of regional and general anesthesia in obstetrics; with special reference to transmission of cyclopropane across the placenta. J Am Med Assoc. 1957;165(17):2155-61.
• 11. Mueller MD, Bruhwiler H, Schupfer GK, Luscher KP. Higher rate of fetal acidemia after regional anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90(1):131-4. 12. 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(1):41-5.
• 13. Dyer RA, Els I, Farbas J, Torr GJ, Schoeman LK, James MF, et al. Prospective, randomized trial comparing general with spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in preeclamptic patients with a nonreassuring fetal heart trace. Anesthesiology. 2003;99(3):561-9.
• 14. Hodgson CA, Wauchob TD. A comparison of spinal and general anaesthesia for elective caesarean section: effect on neonatal condition at birth. Int J Obstet Anesth. 1994;3(1):25-30.
• 15. Kavak ZN, Basgul A, Ceyhan N. Short-term outcome of newborn infants: spinal versus general anesthesia for elective cesarean section. A prospective randomized study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;100(1):50-4. 16. Afolabi BB, Lesi FE. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;10:CD004350. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004350.pub3. PMID: 23076903.
• 17. Roberts SW, Leveno KJ, Sidawi JE, Lucas MJ, Kelly MA. Fetal acidemia associated with regional anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85(1):79-83.
• 18. Su CF, Tsai HJ, Huang CC, Luo KH, Lin LY. Fetal acidosis from obstetric interventions during the first vaginal delivery. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;47(4):397-401.
• 19. Gunusen D, Karaman S, Akercan F, Firat V. The effects of different anesthetic techniques on newborn in elective cesarean section: retrospective study. Ege Journal of Medicine 2009;48(3):189-94.
• 20. Purtuloglu T, Ozkan S, Teksoz E, Dere K, Sen H, Yen T. Comparison of the maternal and fetal effects of general and spinal anesthesia in elective cesarean section. Gulhane Medical Journal 2008;50(2):91-7.
• 21. Karadogan F, Ar AY, Akgun FN, Yuce N, Senay E. The Effects of Different Anesthesiological Methods Used at Elective Caeserian Sections on New Borns. Bosphorus Medical Journal. 2014;1(1):10-8.
• 22. Akyuz G, Leblebicier MA. Anatomy and Assessment of the Autonomic Nervous System. Turk J Phys Med Rehab. 2012;58(1);1-5.
• 23. Saygi AI, Ozdamar O, Gun I, Emirkadı H, Mungen E, Akpak YK. Comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes among patients undergoing cesarean section under general and spinal anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial. Sao Paulo Med J. 2015;133(3):227-34.