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: General anaesthesia or lumbar epidural block for caesarean section? Effects on the foetal heart rate.
    Author: Belfrage P, Irestedt L, Raabe N, Arnér S.
    Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand; 1977; 21(1):67-70. PubMed ID: 842272.
    Abstract:
    Caesarean section was performed in 10 patients under general anaesthesia and in 10 other patients under epidural block. The foetal heart rate was monitored continuously during anaesthesia and operation with a scalp electrode and a cardiotocograph. There was no major difference between the two anaesthetic techniques in their effect on the foetal heart rate. The most common finding was a reduction of the beat-to-beat variation. The operative time was longer in the epidural group than in the general anaesthesia group, due to a higher frequency of Pfannenstiel incisions and repeat caesarean sections in the epidural group. Clinically, all newborns seemed to be unaffected, with normal Apgar scores. Epidural block seems to be a good alternative to general anaesthesia for caesarean section, particularly when a long operative time is expected.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]