•  
  •  
 

Document Type

Original Article

Abstract

Background: Both spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia have risk-benefit profiles that strongly favor spinal anesthesia for the majority of pregnant women. Consider the potential for clinically significant maternal haemodynamic derangements, difficult airway management, stroke, and adverse neonatal outcomes.

Aim: to compare the sensory and motor blockade, hemodynamic changes, nausea and vomiting, duration of the technique, and patient satisfaction of two distinct positions used to induce spinal anesthesia during a caesarean section.

Patients and Methods: In a prospective randomized uncontrolled trial conducted at Al-Azhar University Hospitals (Assiut) on 80 pregnant women scheduled for an elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia from September 2021 to May 2022.

Results: According to the modified bromage score, the parturients who received intrathecal spinal anaesthetics in the lateral position had faster sensory blockade than those who received spinal anaesthetics in the sitting position. However, they had the same level of sensory blockade and degree of motor block. In terms of how long the procedure took, we noticed that spinal anesthesia took longer in the lateral group than in the sitting group. The parturient finds the sitting position during spinal anesthesia to be more convenient than the lateral position (P=0.0035). There was a non-significant difference in the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, and the requirement for ephedrine between the two groups that were being studied.

Conclusion: In spinal anesthesia for a cesarean section, the sitting position is more comfortable than the lateral position

Keywords

Spinal anesthesia; elective cesarean section; sitting and left lateral position

Subject Area

Anesthesiology

Download

Share

COinS