A retrospective study of the outcome of cesarean section for women with severe pre-eclampsia in a third world setting
2011

Comparing Anesthesia Methods for Cesarean Delivery in Women with Severe Pre-eclampsia

Sample size: 96 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Ajuzieogu Obinna V., Ezike Humphrey, Amucheazi Adaobi, Obianuju Enwereji Jamike

Primary Institution: University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria

Hypothesis

What is the outcome of subarachnoid block versus general anesthesia in cesarean delivery for women with severe pre-eclampsia?

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in maternal and perinatal mortality outcomes between women with severe pre-eclampsia who had regional anesthesia and those who had general anesthesia, but more babies experienced birth asphyxia in the general anesthesia group.

Supporting Evidence

  • Maternal mortality was 5.4% in the spinal group and 11.9% in the general anesthesia group.
  • Perinatal mortality was 2.7% in the spinal group and 11.9% in the general anesthesia group.
  • More babies in the general anesthesia group had Apgar scores less than 7 at 1 minute and 5 minutes.

Takeaway

Doctors wanted to see if using a spinal block or general anesthesia was better for women having a cesarean section due to severe pre-eclampsia. They found that both methods had similar outcomes, but babies born with general anesthesia had more problems breathing.

Methodology

A retrospective study comparing outcomes of cesarean sections performed under subarachnoid block and general anesthesia from January 2005 to June 2009.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to retrospective design and exclusion of certain cases.

Limitations

The study was limited to a single institution and may not be generalizable to other settings.

Participant Demographics

Women with severe pre-eclampsia undergoing cesarean section, mean ages 31 years for spinal anesthesia and 29 years for general anesthesia.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.0006

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.4103/1658-354X.76480

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication