Volume 12, Issue 1 (4-2021)
JAP 2021, 12(1): 44-54 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.AJUMS.REC.1398.217
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Adarvishi S, Dastoorpur M, Yazdani Nejad H, Mohammadi P, Kurd Nejad M, Ranjbarha R et al . Comparison of neonatal and maternal outcomes after cesarean
delivery with general anesthesia and spinal anesthesia. JAP 2021; 12 (1) :44-54
URL: http://jap.iums.ac.ir/article-1-5554-en.html
URL: http://jap.iums.ac.ir/article-1-5554-en.html
Sara Adarvishi1 
, Maryam Dastoorpur1 , Hamid Yazdani Nejad 2, Parisa Mohammadi1 , Maedeh Kurd Nejad1 , Razieh Ranjbarha1 , Zahra Akhlaghi1
, Maryam Dastoorpur1 , Hamid Yazdani Nejad 2, Parisa Mohammadi1 , Maedeh Kurd Nejad1 , Razieh Ranjbarha1 , Zahra Akhlaghi1
1- Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences
2- Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences ,hyazdaninejhad@gmail.com
2- Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences ,
Abstract: (1700 Views)
Aims and background: The choice of anesthesia for cesarean section depends on factors such as the cause of
the operation, the degree of urgency of the operation and the patient’s desire. Following the choice of any of the
methods either general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia for mother and baby will have consequences. The aim
of this study was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes after cesarean section with general and spinal
anesthesia in teaching hospitals in Ahvaz in 1398.
Materials & Methods: This analytical study was performed in 1398 on 110 pregnant women aged 20-35
years who are candidates for repeat elective cesarean section in Ahvaz educational hospitals for termination of
pregnancy. The research instruments included a three-part questionnaire related to demographic characteristics
and pre-cesarean section information and post-cesarean section information. SPSS software version 22 and
paired t-test and independent t-test and chi-square were used to describe and analyze the data.
Results: The use of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section was associated with less pain, less analgesia, higher
Apgar score, higher hematocrit and hemoglobin, no sore throat, and more satisfaction compared to general
anesthesia. But the complications of nausea, vomiting and postoperative headache are more common in the
group with spinal anesthesia.
Conclusion: Therefore, according to the results of the study, it is recommended to use spinal anesthesia as
much as possible in cesarean delivery
the operation, the degree of urgency of the operation and the patient’s desire. Following the choice of any of the
methods either general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia for mother and baby will have consequences. The aim
of this study was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes after cesarean section with general and spinal
anesthesia in teaching hospitals in Ahvaz in 1398.
Materials & Methods: This analytical study was performed in 1398 on 110 pregnant women aged 20-35
years who are candidates for repeat elective cesarean section in Ahvaz educational hospitals for termination of
pregnancy. The research instruments included a three-part questionnaire related to demographic characteristics
and pre-cesarean section information and post-cesarean section information. SPSS software version 22 and
paired t-test and independent t-test and chi-square were used to describe and analyze the data.
Results: The use of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section was associated with less pain, less analgesia, higher
Apgar score, higher hematocrit and hemoglobin, no sore throat, and more satisfaction compared to general
anesthesia. But the complications of nausea, vomiting and postoperative headache are more common in the
group with spinal anesthesia.
Conclusion: Therefore, according to the results of the study, it is recommended to use spinal anesthesia as
much as possible in cesarean delivery
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Gynecologic anesthesia
Received: 2020.10.9 | Accepted: 2020.11.21 | Published: 2021.04.30
Received: 2020.10.9 | Accepted: 2020.11.21 | Published: 2021.04.30
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
