From: Anesthesia for cesarean delivery: general or regional anesthesia—a systematic review
Author/year | Title | Method | No. of participants | Location |
---|---|---|---|---|
Abdallah/2014 (Abdallah et al. 2014) | A comparative study of GA versus combined spinal-epidural anesthesia on the fetus in cesarean section | Cross-sectional observational prospective study | 60 consecutive pregnant women at term | Kasr Al-Aini Obstetric Hospital, Egypt |
Jain/2013 (Jain et al. 2013) | A randomized comparison of the effects of low-dose spinal or GA on umbilical cord blood gases during cesarean delivery of growth-restricted fetuses with impaired Doppler flow | Prospective, randomized clinical trial | 40 pregnant women | Tertiary care hospital, India |
Arslantas/2019 (Arslantas and Umuroglu 2019) | Comparing the effects of general and spinal anesthesia on the postoperative pain intensity in patients undergoing emergent or elective cesarean section | Prospective, observational study | 212 parturient women | Istanbul, Turkey |
Chen/2019 (Chen et al. 2019) | Comparison of effects of GA and combined spinal/epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery on umbilical cord blood gas values: a double-blind, randomized, controlled study | A double-blind, randomized, controlled study | 112 parturient women | The First People’s Hospital of Jingzhou, China |
Saygi/2015 (Saygi et al. 2015) | Comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes among patients undergoing cesarean section under general and spinal anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial | Randomized clinical trial | 100 patients who underwent elective cesarean section | Tertiary-level public hospital, Istanbul, Turkey |
Solangi/2012 (Solangi et al. 2012) | Comparison of the effects of general versus spinal anesthesia on neonatal outcome | Randomized control trial | 160 patients | Peoples Medical College Hospital, Nawabshah, Pakistan |
Açıkel/2017 (Açıkel et al. 2017) | Comparison of patient satisfaction between general and spinal anesthesia in emergency cesarean deliveries | Prospective, single-blind, cross-sectional clinical study | 100 patients | Turkey |
Edipoglu/2018 (Edipoglu et al. 2018) | Effect of anesthetic technique on neonatal morbidity in emergency cesarean section for fetal distress | Prospective observational study | 61 patients | Tertiary Education and Research Hospital, Turkey |
Mancuso/2010 (Mancuso et al. 2010) | General versus spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean sections: effects on neonatal short-term outcome. A prospective randomized study | A prospective randomized study | 234 pregnant women | Department of Gynecological, Obstetrical Sciences and Reproductive Medicine in Messina University Hospital, Italy |
Madkour/2019 (Madkour et al. 2019) | General versus spinal anesthesia during elective cesarean section in term low-risk pregnancy as regards maternal and neonatal outcomes: a prospective, controlled clinical trial | Prospective, controlled clinical trial | 64 low-risk pregnant women | Zagazig University Hospital, Egypt |
Staikou/2013 (Staikou et al. 2013) | Maternal and umbilical cord oxygen content and acid-base balance in relation to general, epidural or subarachnoid anesthesia for term elective cesarean section | Randomized study | 380 parturient women | Athens, Greece |
Saracoglu/2012 (Saracoglu et al. 2012) | Neuraxial block versus GA for cesarean section: post-operative pain scores and analgesic requirements | Prospective, double-blinded study | 60 patients undergoing elective cesarean surgery | Central Education and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey |
Havas/2013 (Havas et al. 2013) | Spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean section is associated with shorter hospital stay compared to GA | Prospective study | 188 term parturient women | Istanbul, Turkey |
Kessous/2012 (Kessous et al. 2012) | Spinal versus GA in cesarean sections: the effects on postoperative pain perception | Prospective, observational study | 153 women were enrolled | Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Soroka University Medical Centre in Be’er Sheva, Israel |