Archive | 2021

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

 
 
 

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.

Volume 7
Pages 81-87
DOI 10.19127/MBSJOHS.878391
Language English
Journal None

Full Text