Anesthesia during caesarean sections: a comparison between general anesthesia and semi-anesthesia

Abstract

The purpose of the study, or the reason why the research was performed, is the comparison between general anesthesia and semi-anesthesia during cesarean sections, since the selection of this anesthetic technique must be borne in mind first in order to rule out the extreme maternal emergency, as neonatal safety is primary. A methodological center was used for data analysis in the absence of evidence databases. Our aim is to foster a debate on clinical practice implications in a spirit of openness with other healthcare professionals, in line with scientific evidence-based research. Given the mortality and morbidity of cesarean section in general and of general anesthesia in particular, knowing the varied parameters for choosing anesthetic technique is of absolutely greater interest for the patient. Along with the neonatal pulse rate, the blood pressure of the newborn was also analyzed. This contrasts with systematic reviews. (Naus et al.2024)
Thus, the need to establish "real and statistically robust grounds" on which to focus greater attention in the anesthetic choice, and to allow the anesthetist to advise the patient with evidence-based recommendations. To support this conclusion, we conducted a clinical study comparing general anesthesia and semi-anesthesia: there are no relevant differences in maternal hypotension or vasopressor use to prevent it, in the amount of blood loss or the quality of bleeding from the uterus. The stomach raffinage required for the intragastric suction of pregnant women is statistically significant between the two hospital centers, but there is no clinical relevance to advise which surgical technique to use. In the cesarean section, or in the central blocks of this study, no differences are to be expected in the quality and safety of the anesthesia that can be compared with the mother.