Why the study?
Does epidural anesthesia compared to general anesthesia affect neurologic recovery in infants following elective cesarean section?
Does epidural anesthesia compared to general anesthesia affect neurologic recovery in infants following elective cesarean section?
There is no significant difference in infant neurologic recovery between epidural and general anesthesia for elective cesarean section, though maternal hypotension during epidural anesthesia correlates with weaker infant reflexes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No difference in neonatal recovery supports anesthesia choice flexibility; leaves open hypotension-reflex associations.
Elective cesarean section was performed in a consecutive series of 30 patients with full-term pregnancies who were not in labor. Epidural (lidocaine, 1.5 per cent, with epinephrine, 1:200,000) and general anesthesia (thiopental, nitrous oxide-oxygen, succinylcholine infusion) was used alternately. Neonatal acid-base values and Apgar scores showed no significant difference between the two anesthetic groups, and most infants were vigorous at birth. The neurologic recoveries of the infants showed no significant difference between the two groups. In the group receiving epidural anesthesia, there was a significant correlation between maternal hypotension and weak rooting and sucking reflexes of the infants during the first two days. All infants of high-risk obstetric patients in the series, independent of anesthetic technique used, had abnormal neurologic activity, as evidenced by either depression of muscle tone and the reflexes or all the tested variables. Neurologic assessment as followed in this series is a sensitive indicator of the effects of fetal stress factors acting during cesarean section.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hollmén et al. (1978) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: