Fetomaternal outcome in severe preeclamptic women undergoing emergency cesarean section under either general or spinal anesthesia.

Suman Chattopadhyay, Ashok Das, Subrata Pahari
Author Information
  1. Suman Chattopadhyay: Department of Anaesthesiology, Medical College & Hospital, 88 College Street, Kolkata 700073, India ; BC 103, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700064, India.
  2. Ashok Das: Department of Anaesthesiology, Medical College & Hospital, 88 College Street, Kolkata 700073, India.
  3. Subrata Pahari: Department of Anaesthesiology, Medical College & Hospital, 88 College Street, Kolkata 700073, India.

Abstract

This prospective observational study compared the effects of general and spinal anesthesia in 173 severe preeclamptic women undergoing emergency cesarean section. 146 (84.5%) patients underwent spinal anesthesia (SA) and 27 (15.5%) patients had general anesthesia (GA). Most of the patients were primigravid and nulliparous. Intraoperatively SA group required more intravenous fluid and vasopressor support, while GA group required more preoperative labetalol injection for blood pressure control. Overall 13.3% of patients required critical care, particularly GA group (44.4% versus 7.5%; P < 0.001). Patients receiving GA had a higher mortality (25.9% versus 1.4%; P < 0.001). The length of hospital stay was comparable. Significantly more neonates of patients receiving GA were found to be preterm (77.8% versus 44.5%; P < 0.01) and required advanced resuscitation. GA group also had higher neonatal mortality (29.6% versus 11%; P < 0.05). To conclude, severe preeclamptic mothers receiving general anesthesia and their babies required more critical care support. Maternal as well as neonatal mortality was significantly higher with general anesthesia.

References

Anesth Analg. 2005 Sep;101(3):862-868 [PMID: 16116005]
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Jul;183(1):S1-S22 [PMID: 10920346]
Am Fam Physician. 2008 Jul 1;78(1):93-100 [PMID: 18649616]
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009 Aug;22(8):688-92 [PMID: 19504406]
Saudi J Anaesth. 2011 Jan;5(1):15-8 [PMID: 21655010]
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2008 Apr;17(2):130-6 [PMID: 18313286]
J Perinatol. 2000 Mar;20(2):78-81 [PMID: 10785880]
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009 Jan;29(1):25-30 [PMID: 19280491]
Anesth Analg. 2005 Sep;101(3):859-861 [PMID: 16116004]
J Pediatr. 1991 Sep;119(3):417-23 [PMID: 1880657]
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2009 Apr;18(2):142-9 [PMID: 19195873]
J Indian Med Assoc. 2011 Mar;109(3):166-70 [PMID: 22010585]
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007 Mar;21(2):98-113 [PMID: 17302638]
Crit Care Med. 2005 Oct;33(10 Suppl):S259-68 [PMID: 16215346]
J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2012 Aug;62(4):413-8 [PMID: 23904701]
J Pregnancy. 2011;2011:481095 [PMID: 21547090]
BJOG. 2011 Mar;118 Suppl 1:1-203 [PMID: 21356004]
BJOG. 2001 Apr;108(4):378-82 [PMID: 11305544]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Anesthesia, General
Anesthesia, Spinal
Anticonvulsants
Antihypertensive Agents
Apgar Score
Cesarean Section
Female
Fetal Mortality
Gestational Age
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Infant, Premature
Labetalol
Magnesium Sulfate
Maternal Mortality
Methyldopa
Pre-Eclampsia
Pregnancy
Premature Birth
Prospective Studies
Seizures
Severity of Illness Index
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult

Chemicals

Anticonvulsants
Antihypertensive Agents
Methyldopa
Magnesium Sulfate
Labetalol

Word Cloud

Similar Articles

Cited By