Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/9088
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSivevski, Atanasen_US
dc.contributor.authorSHoljakova, Marijaen_US
dc.contributor.authorAndrijan Kartaloven_US
dc.contributor.authorBiljana Kuzmanovskaen_US
dc.contributor.authorDurnev, Vesnaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-18T11:22:19Z-
dc.date.available2020-09-18T11:22:19Z-
dc.date.issued2015-01-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/9088-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Both spinal (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) are commonly used for operative management of pre-eclampsia parturients. Low dose SA is practical with faster onset and with fewer complications. This study aims to compare the effect of low dose SA or GA on neonatal wellbeing for preeclamptic par-turients undergoing emergency cesarean section Methodology: This prospective randomized study was carried out at University Clinic of Anesthesiology and University Clinic of Gynecology and Obstetrics at UCIM, Skopje, Republic of Macedonia. Sixty (n=60) pre-eclamptic parturients undergoing emergency cesarean section were divided in two groups receiving low dose spinal (SA) or general anesthesia (GA). Intra operatively we monitored and evaluated parturi-ents’ ECG, heart rate, noninvasive blood pressure, ephedrine requirement’s, as well as neonatal umbilical artery ( UA) blood gas samples and Apgar scores.Main outcome measure was a comparison of the influence of two different anesthesia methods (low dose SA vs. GA) on neonatal wellbeing, measured by umbilical artery (UA) blood gases, Apgar score and mark-ers of fetal hypoxemia with non-invasive hemodynamic status in 60 pre-eclampsia parturients undergoing non-elective (emergency) cesarean section (CS). Results: There was no statistical difference in the mean arterial blood pressure between the groups (90.6 ± 12.9 vs. 96 ± 8.9 mm Hg), as well as in the neonatal acid-base status and BE (p> 0.05). Spinal anes-thesia patients required more ephedrine (8,5 vs. 1.7 mg, p < 0.05). The Apgar score was ≥ 7 in 96% of newborns delivered after spinal anesthesia, while 75% after general anesthesia (p < 0.05).Conclusion We conclude that low dose spinal anesthesia can be safely used in pre-eclamptic parturients for emergency cesarean section (PDF) Comparison of low dose spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia in pre-eclamptic parturients undergoing emergency cesarean section. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282304124_Comparison_of_low_dose_spinal_anesthesia_with_general_anesthesia_in_pre-eclamptic_parturients_undergoing_emergency_cesarean_section [accessed Sep 17 2020].en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofANAESTH, PAIN & INTENSIVE CARE;en_US
dc.subjectCesarean sectionen_US
dc.subjectSpinal anesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectApgar scoreen_US
dc.subjectGeneral anesthesiaen_US
dc.titleComparison of low dose spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia in pre-eclamptic parturients undergoing emergency cesarean sectionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Medicine: Journal Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
08_OAAPICAREOrigTrud.pdf499.6 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

87
checked on Jul 24, 2024

Download(s)

42
checked on Jul 24, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.