Comparison Of General Versus Spinal Anesthesia For Elective Cesarean Section At Northwest General Hospital Peshawar

Abstract

Background: Physiological changes in pregnancy might lead to cesarean section which can be performed through general or spinal anesthesia having different pros and cons and choice of anesthesia might vary depending on the patient’s choice.

Methods: A study at Northwest General Hospital (2022-2023) compared spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) for planned C-sections. They excluded high-risk cases and those with missing data. The study looked at surgery duration, baby's health at birth, blood loss, mom's recovery time, baby needing intensive care, and mom's satisfaction with the anesthesia method.

Results: A study at Northwest General Hospital (2[1]022-2023) compared spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) for planned C-sections. Out of 195 elective C-sections, spinal anesthesia was used in 115 cases (59%) and general anesthesia in 80 (41%). There were no major complications or deaths. The study found that while spinal anesthesia resulted in slightly higher blood loss compared to general anesthesia, there were no significant differences in baby's health at birth (APGAR score), surgery duration, length of hospital stay, or needing the baby to be in intensive care. Importantly, patients who received spinal anesthesia reported significantly higher satisfaction and were more likely to recommend it to others.

Conclusion: Regarding the length of hospital stay, APGAR score at one minute, and admission to neonatal critical care, there was no statistically significant difference between the two kinds of anesthesia. For GA, the estimated blood loss was lower. In comparison, patients were happier with spinal anesthesia.