Key result
In low- and middle-income countries, exposure to general anaesthesia for obstetric procedures increased the odds of maternal death compared with neuraxial anaesthesia (OR 3.3; 95% CI 1.2-9.0).
Why the study?
Does general anaesthesia or management by non-physician anaesthetists increase maternal mortality in pregnant women undergoing obstetric procedures in low-income and middle-income countries?
Population
Pregnant women exposed to anaesthesia for an obstetric procedure in low-income and middle-income countries.
Comparison
General anaesthesia; management by non-physician… vs Neuraxial anaesthesia; management by physician…
Design
Meta-analysis
Authors
Loading...
Supports neuraxial preference for obstetric procedures in LMICs; extends observational evidence but leaves causality and practice change open.
Meta-Analysis (n=32,149,636)
Yes
Does general anaesthesia or management by non-physician anaesthetists increase maternal mortality in pregnant women undergoing obstetric procedures in low-income and middle-income countries?
Odds Ratio: 3.3 (95% CI 1.2–9)
In low- and middle-income countries, anaesthesia accounts for 2.8% of all maternal deaths, with general anaesthesia and non-physician providers associated with significantly higher mortality risks.
Sobhy et al. (2016) conducted a meta-analysis in Obstetric procedures requiring anaesthesia (n=32,149,636). General anaesthesia vs. Neuraxial anaesthesia was evaluated on Maternal death (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-9.0). In low- and middle-income countries, exposure to general anaesthesia for obstetric procedures increased the odds of maternal death compared with neuraxial anaesthesia (OR 3.3; 95% CI 1.2-9.0).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: