These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Comparison of the effects of general and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section on fetuses].
    Author: Zhu CX, Chen H, Huang HF.
    Journal: Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Apr; 40(4):253-5. PubMed ID: 15924673.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety of regular doses of general anesthesia and epidural anesthesia on neonates delivered by cesarean sections. METHODS: Singleton pregnant women for whom elective cesarean sections were planned after 37 gestational weeks were allocated to general anesthesia group (platelet count < 50 x 10(9)/L) or epidural anesthesia group (platelet count > or = 50 x 10(9)/L). Arterial and venous samples were withdrawn from the doubly clamped umbilical cord segment at delivery for the pH, bicarbonate, PO2, and PCO2. All delivery times, birth weights, and Apgar scores at 1 min, 5 min were recorded. RESULTS: The mean Apgar score at 1 min for the general anesthesia group was 9.5 +/- 1.1 and 9.8 +/- 0.7 for the epidural anesthesia group, without significant difference (P > 0.05). The Apgar scores at 5 min of all newborns were 10. The mean umbilical arterial and venous blood pH for the general anesthesia group were 7.31 +/- 0.06, 7.31 +/- 0.04, and 7.28 +/- 0.07, 7.32 +/- 0.05 for the epidural anesthesia group respectively. No significant difference was found between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective study suggests that mode of anesthesia does not influence significantly the outcome of newborn infants delivered by elective cesarean section. It seems that both general and epidural anesthesia can be used in elective term cesarean sections safely.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]