Maternal and neonatal outcome after cesarean section: The impact of anesthesia

Background. Among the anesthetic technologies used, regional anesthesia is becoming the most common in cesarean section (CS) deliveries. Aim. This retrospective survey examined the variables taken into account when selecting the anesthetic technique to be used, and how this choice affects the outcome for the mother and the newborn. Methods. One thousand eight hundred and seventy elective and emergency CS were evaluated for anesthetic technique used, indications, and maternal and neonatal outcome. Results. Of the 611 elective CS (32.6%), 206 (33.8%) were performed under general anesthesia and 405 (66.2%) under regional anesthesia. Of the 1259 emergency CS performed (67.4%), 525 (41.9%) were under general anesthesia and 734 (58.1%) under regional anesthesia. Conditions associated with a newborn 1-minute Apgar score of <7 were general anesthesia and multiple pregnancy (p < 0.01); a 5-minute Apgar score of <7 was only associated with multiple pregnancy. The most important factor for very low Apgar scores was the presence of fetal malformations. Whatever the chosen technique, neither maternal deaths directly or indirectly due to the anesthesia nor major maternal and perinatal complications were found. Conclusions. This survey confirms the preference for regional anesthesia during elective cesarean sections and for general anesthesia in emergency situations. Moreover, newborn outcome was found not to be influenced either by the technique used or by the character of the procedure.

[1]  Y. Rasmussen [Regional anesthesia for Cesarean section]. , 2005, Ugeskrift for laeger.

[2]  C. Black,et al.  Cesarean Delivery in the United Kingdom: Time Trends in the General Practice Research Database , 2005, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[3]  T. Bogard,et al.  Incidence and characteristics of failures in obstetric neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of 19,259 deliveries. , 2004, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[4]  S. Yeo,et al.  General anesthesia for cesarean section in a Singapore maternity hospital: a retrospective survey. , 2004, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[5]  J. Littleford Effects on the fetus and newborn of maternal analgesia and anesthesia: a review , 2004, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[6]  R. McCahon,et al.  Time required for surgical readiness in emergency caesarean section: spinal compared with general anaesthesia. , 2003, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[7]  C. Berg,et al.  Pregnancy‐Related Mortality in the United States, 1991–1997 , 2003, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  J. Ramanathan,et al.  Effects of Obstetric Analgesics and Anesthetics on the Neonate , 2003, Paediatric drugs.

[9]  J. Hawkins Maternal morbidity and mortality: anesthetic causes , 2002 .

[10]  Z. Kavak,et al.  Short-term outcome of newborn infants: spinal versus general anesthesia for elective cesarean section. A prospective randomized study. , 2001, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[11]  A. Herbst,et al.  Low 5‐Minute Apgar Score: A Population‐Based Register Study of 1 Million Term Births , 2001, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  K. Leveno,et al.  The continuing value of the Apgar score for the assessment of newborn infants. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  L. Papile The Apgar score in the 21st century. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  S. Ghaem-Maghami,et al.  Indications for caesarean section. , 2001, Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology.

[15]  P. Morley-Forster Regional techniques for cesarean section , 2001 .

[16]  I. Russell,et al.  A survey of anaesthetic techniques used for caesarean section in the UK in 1997. , 2000, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[17]  M. Richardson Regional anesthesia for obstetrics. , 2000, Anesthesiology clinics of North America.

[18]  G. Sacks Caesarean section: an evolving procedure? , 1999, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[19]  U. Stamer,et al.  Anaesthesia for caesarean section — a German survey , 1998, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[20]  L. Tsen,et al.  General anesthesia for cesarean section at a tertiary care hospital 1990-1995: indications and implications. , 1998, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[21]  S. Gabbe,et al.  Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies , 1998 .

[22]  Joy L. Hawkins,et al.  Anesthesia-Related Deaths During Obstetric Delivery in the United States, 1979-1990 , 1997 .

[23]  L. Koonin,et al.  Anesthesia‐related Deaths during Obstetric Delivery in the United States, 1979–1990 , 1997, Anesthesiology.

[24]  G. Lyons,et al.  Failed intubation revisited: 17-yr experience in a teaching maternity unit. , 1996, British journal of anaesthesia.

[25]  I. Russell,et al.  A survey of anaesthesia for caesarean section. , 1995, International journal of obstetric anesthesia.

[26]  C. Doré,et al.  Increase in Mallampati score during pregnancy. , 1995, British journal of anaesthesia.

[27]  W. Dick Anaesthesia for caesarean section (epidural and general): effects on the neonate. , 1995, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[28]  S. Cnattingius,et al.  Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. , 1994, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[29]  J. Evans,et al.  Neonatal wellbeing after elective caesarean delivery with general, spinal, and epidural anaesthesia. , 1993, European journal of anaesthesiology.

[30]  P. Brownridge Spinal anaesthesia in obstetrics. , 1991, British journal of anaesthesia.

[31]  J. R. Young,et al.  Difficult tracheal intubation: a retrospective study , 1987, Anaesthesia.

[32]  S. Clark,et al.  Placenta Previa/Accreta and Prior Cesarean Section , 1985, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[33]  A. Adelstein,et al.  Report on confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in England and Wales 1967-1969. , 1972, Reports on health and social subjects.