• E Traub, W Dick, E Knoche, J Muck, H Kraus, and U Töllner.
• Reg Anaesth. 1984 Jan 1;7(1):15-24.

AbstractIn a prospective interdisciplinary study involving the departments of gynaecology, anaesthetics and paediatrics, the influence on both the mother and neonate of general as opposed to epidural anaesthesia was compared in 47 planned caesarean sections. Neither maternal or foetal risk factors were present in these cases, and the cardiotocogram was always normal before the anaesthetic was applied. Methods. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were carefully monitored. Under an identical infusion regime the following parameters were estimated in maternal blood: blood gas and acid-base status, blood sugar, lactate, beta-hydroxybutyric acid, ACTH and cortisol. These same parameters were also estimated in cord blood taken at delivery. The Apgar score at 1, 5 and 10 minutes, and a complete paediatric assessment including neurostatus at 15 minutes, 24 hours and 7 days of age were used to assess neonatal status. Some of the women given a general anaesthetic initially had marked increases in blood pressure and pulse, while about a third of the epidural cases showed a blood pressure fall despite positioning in the left lateral position in order to prevent the aorto-caval syndrome. An increase in lactate, ACTH and cortisol was found in both groups up to the time of delivery, when the ACTH level of the general anaesthetic group was significantly higher. Acid-base and PCO2 values were not markedly influenced by either of the techniques used, but the maternal capillary PO2 levels were very much higher in the general anaesthetic group. The neonates born under general anaesthetic had a lower 1 min Apgar score, as a result of the relatively long induction-delivery time, of on average 17 min. The 5 and 10 min Apgar scores and the neurophysiological development of the babies revealed no differences between the two groups.

21 keywords...

hide…