Comparative study between general and thoracic spinal anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Spinal anaesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A comparison with general anaesthesia regarding haemodynamic and respiratory stability - IJCA- Print ISSN No: - 2394-4781 Online ISSN No:- 2394-4994 Article DOI No:- 10.18231/j.ijca.2019.047, Indian Journal of Clinical Anaesthesia-Indian J Clin Anaesth

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the preferred approach for treating gallstone disease because of its minimally invasive characteristics. However, factors such as increased intra-abdominal pressure, pneumoperitoneum, and positional changes present significant challenges in anesthetic management. While LC is typically performed under general anesthesia, thoracic segmental spinal anesthesia and cervical plexus block have emerged as effective alternatives in patients for whom general anesthesia poses a high risk. This study reports the use of thoracic spinal anesthesia combined with cervical plexus block in patients where general anesthesia is considered risky. After obtaining informed consent for awake laparoscopic surgery, anesthesia was managed under appropriate monitoring. The combination of spinal anesthesia and cervical plexus block allowed for the successful completion of the procedure, with minimal complications observed in the early postoperative period. In conclusion, thoracic segmental spinal anesthesia and intermediate cervical plexus block offer a safe and effective alternative for patients at high risk for general anesthesia.

Introduction: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of renal stone disease, usually performed under General Anaesthesia (GA). Regional anaesthesia, specifically Thoracic Segmental Spinal Anaesthesia (TSSA), offers a suitable alternative to mitigate complications associated with GA. TSSA in PCNL has an advantage over conventional lumbar spinal anaesthesia in terms of better haemodynamic stability, attributed to the lesser amount of local anaesthetic drug required. However, its clinical utility is yet to be fully explored. Aim: To investigate the feasibility and efficacy of TSSA in patients undergoing PCNL by analysing their medical records. Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted on 250 patients from January 2022 to July 2023 at GNRC Medical, Guwahati, India. Patients aged 20- 70 years with American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) I and II classification, undergoing PCNL with renal stones ≤40 mm, were included. TSSA was administered at the T9-T10 intervertebral space. Intraoperative parameters, degree of motor and sensory block, post-operative analgesia, patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded. Descriptive statistics of the study were analysed in Microsoft excel and presented as mean with standard deviation or as numbers and percentages. Results: The patients in the study had a mean age of 41.08 years, Body Mass Index (BMI) of 25.52 kg/m2 , stone size of 25.73 mm, and surgical duration of 74.92 minutes. TSSA was associated with minimal intraoperative hypotension (6%) and bradycardia (8.9%), zero incidences of neurological complications, and did not require conversion to GA. Complete stone clearance was achieved in 89.6% of cases. Post-operative analgesia was excellent in 179 (71.6%) patients as they did not require any rescue analgesia within the first 24 hours. Patient and surgeon satisfaction were notably high. Conclusion: TSSA emerges as a safe and efficient alternative to GA in selected cases of PCNL. Patient and surgeon satisfaction, along with minimal post-operative complications, support its consideration and usage. However, the choice of anaesthesia should be individualised based on procedural complexities and patient characteristics.

Aim:A double-blinded randomized controlled study to compare discharge time and patient satisfaction between two groups of patients submitted to open surgeries for abdominal malignancies using segmental thoracic spinal or general anesthesia.Background:Open surgeries for abdominal malignancy are usually done under general anesthesia, but many patients with major medical problems sometimes can’t tolerate such anesthesia. Regional anesthesia namely segmental thoracic spinal anesthesia may be beneficial in such patients.Materials and Methods:A total of 60 patients classified according to American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) as class II or III undergoing surgeries for abdominal malignancy, like colonic or gastric carcinoma, divided into two groups, 30 patients each. Group G, received general anesthesia, Group S received a segmental (T9-T10 injection) thoracic spinal anesthesia with intrathecal injection of 2 ml of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (10 mg) and 20 ug fentanyl citrate. Intraoperative monitoring, postoperative pain, complications, recovery time, and patient satisfaction at follow-up were compared between the two groups.Results:Spinal anesthesia was performed easily in all 30 patients, although two patients complained of paraesthesiae, which responded to slight needle withdrawal. No patient required conversion to general anesthesia, six patients required midazolam for anxiety and six patients required phenylephrine and atropine for hypotension and bradycardia, recovery was uneventful and without sequelae. The two groups were comparable with respect to gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, ASA classification, preoperative oxygen saturation and preoperative respiratory rate and operative time.Conclusion:This preliminary study has shown that segmental thoracic spinal anesthesia can be used successfully and effectively for open surgeries for abdominal malignancies by experienced anesthetists. It showed shorter postanesthesia care unit stay, better postoperative pain relief and patient satisfaction than general anesthesia.

Background: Anesthesia is needed to ensure both maternal and fetal safety during cesarean sections. General anesthesia can be used for the rapid procedure in obstetric emergencies while regional anesthesia can be used for cesarean section due to its effectiveness.Objective: The objective of this study was to compare intra-operative and postoperative maternal and fetal complications with general and spinal anesthesia during cesarean section.Material and Methods: A total of 100 patients admitted for cesarean sections were included in this study and categorized into two groups (50 each) based on the anesthesia used either general or spinal anesthesia. All the demographic data, type of anesthesia, and post-anesthesia complications were determined. Results: A total of hundred patients were included and categorized into two (GA and SA) equal groups of 50 patients each. The mean age of the General anesthesia group was 29.9±3.8 while the spinal anesthesia group's mean age was 29.8±3.0. Parity was 1.6±0.7 and 1.9±0.7 in the general anesthesia and spinal anesthesia group respectively. The preoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit values were insignificant with p=0.257 and p=0.165 respectively. 24 hours after the operation were significantly lower in the general anesthesia group than in the spinal anesthesia group (P <0.001 and P=0.004, respectively). The proportion of newborns with 5th-min Apgar scores < 7 was not significantly different between the two groups, although the general anesthesia group had a significantly larger proportion of newborns with 1-min Apgar scores <7 than the spinal anesthesia group P=<0.001). Keywords: General anesthesia, Spinal anesthesia, Caesarean section, Apgar score.

Background: The laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure is typically carried out under general anesthesia, but regional techniques, such as low thoracic isobaric spinal anesthesia, have been used to manage patients with significant medical problem like coexisting systemic disease, who are deemed to be high risk in general anesthesia. Segmental spinal anesthesia has great outcomes in terms of post-operative discomfort, the need for analgesics, relatively fewer complications, and shorter hospital stays. Thus the aim of this study to avoid and minimize the risk of general anesthesia who does not have any significant comorbidity. So it might be a substitute for a standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Material and Methods: Total 60 adult patient with ASA1 & I I, 18-60 years, with normal coagulation profile, is divided into 2 groups. Group IS (Isobaric) - given 2.5 ml of isobaric preservative free bupivacaine 0.5% (levobupivacaine) + 0.5 mg of Fentanyl at T9-T10/T10-T11 into sub arachnoid space. Group GA – given general anesthesia using propofol, fentanyl citrate and atracurium besylate. After intubation, ventilation was controlled and balanced anesthesia was continued with isoflurane. After completion, neuromuscular block was anatagonized neostigmine methylsulfate and glycopyrrolate at the end of surgery. Results: Isobaric spinal anesthesia showed good control in intraoperative as well as postoperative pain control as compared to general anesthesia. In few patients, there were minor degrees of nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, shoulder pain, patient anxiety or itchng which were treated with standard medication like fentanyl and midazolam. All patients can resume oral intake on the day of surgery. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study provide evidence that segmental spinal anesthesia can be used in place of general anesthesia in healthy individuals also.

Background: In our group, after a study showing that spinal anesthesia is safe when compared with general anesthesia, spinal anesthesia has been the technique of choice for this procedure. This is a retrospective study with patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under thoracic spinal anesthesia. Methods: A total of 505 laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients operated under spinal anesthesia were included in this study. Spinal anesthesia was between T8 to T11, with a 27G cutting point or pencil tip in lateral or sitting. Spinal anesthesia was performed with two doses of 0.5% bupivacaine hyperbaric plus 25 µg of fentanyl, until reaching the sensitive level of T3. We evaluated the demographics, analgesia, and degree of motor block, incidence of paresthesia, bradycardia, hypotension, anesthesia success and neurological complications. Results: All 505 patients developed spinal. Neither the dose of hyperbaric solution of 0.5% bupivacaine nor the addition of fentanyl affected the onset of sensory block. The duration of sensory block was greater than the motor block with hyperbaric solution. Bradycardia occurred in 16 (3.1%) patients, and was not correlated with the level of thoracic puncture. Hypotension occurred in 82 (16.2%), with no significant association with the dose of local anesthetic. None of the 505 patients had the maximum degree of lower limb motor block, with significant difference in terms of dose. Paresthesia was observed in 28 (5.5%) without significant difference between needles. All paresthesias were transient and without residual sequelae. Conclusion: The beginning of the block is fast regardless of the solution used. By providing a sensory block of longer duration than the motor block hyperbaric bupivacaine is reflected in a better indication. Thoracic spinal anesthesia provides excellent anesthesia for lower limb orthopedic surgery, without neurological sequelae.

Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common operations performed in General Surgery accounting for about 10-15% of all surgeries. Inguinal hernia repair can be done under local, spinal or general anaesthesia. Although specialized hernia centres routinely use local anaesthesia for uncomplicated open inguinal hernia repair, very few surgeons adopt this technique, and prefer performing surgery under spinal or general anaesthesia. We compared the short-term outcomes following open inguinal hernia mesh repair under local, spinal and general anaesthesia in our hospital. (1) To compare the post-operative pain scores among the three groups. (2) To compare the duration of surgery in minutes, the duration of analgesia, analgesic requirement, the time of return to normal activity such as walking, the time of initiation of diet, and the time of voiding after the surgery. Also to compare any complications, such as urinary retention, need for catheterization, nausea and/or emesis, and the length of hospital stay. (3) To observe the impact on health-related quality of life according to EuroQol and patient satisfaction and acceptance of the type of anaesthesia for the procedure. A single centre non-randomised, prospective, observational study was performed in 135 patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair under local (LA), spinal (SA) or general anaesthesia (GA), with 45 patients in each arm, over the span of one year. After approval from the Ethical Committee, and proper informed consent, patients above 18years of age who were to undergo uncomplicated open inguinal hernioplasty were recruited for the study. Lichtensteins tension-free hernioplasty was performed in all cases. The duration of the procedure was calculated from the time of induction or infiltration of local or spinal anaesthesia, till the end of dressing, or extubation in case of general anaesthesia. The duration of analgesia was calculated from the end of the procedure to the feeling of first pain as recorded in the questionnaire. A standard postoperative protocol was employed to determine the pain scores for the first 7days and also to compare the short-term outcomes i.e., duration of analgesia, return to normal activity, complications, post-operative nausea and emesis, analgesic requirement, urinary retention, length of hospital stay, health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction and acceptance were recorded according to standard proforma and EuroQol questionnaire. All the statistical analysis was carried out by SPSS version 16.0. The mean pain scores were lower in the LA group as compared to SA and GA groups from POD-1 to POD-6 (p < 0.001). However, the values from the 7th post-operative days were similar in all three groups and statistically insignificant (p = 0.09). The outcomes such as duration of analgesia, return to activity such as walking, time of first meal and time of discharge from the hospital were all better in the LA group (p < 0.001). The results concerning nausea, vomiting, analgesic use and urinary retention all favour LA. No difference was found among the three groups concerning overall satisfaction and quality of life. In a general surgical setting, we found that local anaesthesia is well tolerated and associated with significantly lower pain scores in the immediate post-operative period and also requires less analgesic use when compared with general and spinal anaesthesia. Patients in the LA group can resume basic activities such as walking, voiding, and initiating diet almost immediately after the procedure and there were no incidences of retention of urine, which was a significant advantage over the other two types of anaesthesia. Patients who were graded as ASA 4 and 5, who were unfit for general anaesthesia, were able to undergo the surgery under local anaesthesia with no postoperative complications. Moreover, the complications and risks of spinal and general anaesthesia are avoided without compromising the quality of surgery and its outcomes. The duration of the surgery as well as hospital stay is significantly less in patients undergoing surgery under local anaesthesia and most cases can be done as a daycare procedure, which is significantly advantageous, especially in low-income settings, with no difference in the health-related quality of life or patient satisfaction and acceptance.

Objective To explore the two different anesthesia methods on hemodynamics and inflammatory cytokines in elderly patients during peroperative period.Methods Fifty elderly patients with Knee Replacement( ASA Ⅰ,Ⅱ )were randomly divided into general anesthesia group( group A,n =25 ) and combined general and epidural anesthesia group( group B,n =25 ).The changes of mean arterial pressure(MAP) and heart rate ( HR ) were monitored before induction of anesthesia ( T1 ),at intubation ( T2 ),during skin incision ( T3 ) and at the time of extubation ( T4 ),at 30 min after extubation ( T5 ).Blood samples were taken from artery for determination of plasma TNF-α,IL-6,IL-10 concentrations before tourniquet inflation ( T5 ),10 min after tourniquet deflation(T6),30 min after tourniquet deflation (T7)and 30 min after operation (T8)by enzymelinked immunosorbent assay(ELISA).Results The MAP and HR of patients in two groups at T2,T3,T4 were all increased when compared with T1 [ group A:HR:( 94.3 ± 10.4 ) bpm,( 96.4 ± 12.7 ) bpm,(93.3 ± 11.1 )bpm vs(62.6 ±7.3)bpm;MAP:( 18.8 ±3.4)kPa,( 19.6 ±3.4)kPa,( 17.8 ±2.0)kPa vs ( 14.5 ± 1.5)kPa,P＜0.05;group B:HR(76.2 ±6.5)bpm,(70.1 ± 9.7) bpm,(71.5 ± 8.3) bpm vs(64.6 ± 8.4) bpm;MAP:( 16.3 ± 2.5 ) kPa,( 15.3 ± 1.2) kPa,( 14.8 ± 1.4) kPa vs ( 14.1 ± 1.3 ) kPa,P ＜ 0.05 ].There was significant difference on MAP and H R between group A and group B( F =11.957,9.745;P ＜ 0.05 ).The level of plasma TNF-α,IL-6 and IL-10 were significantly increased at T6 to T8 compared with T5 in both groups[ groupA:TNF-α:(4.36 ±0.18) ng/L,(7.54 ± 1.23) ng/L,(10.35 ±2.21 )ng/L vs (2.26 ±0.16) ng/L; groupA:IL-6:(4.32 ±0.21 ) ng/L,( 8.35 ± 1.26 ) ng/L,( 10.23 ± 2.23 ) ng/L vs ( 1.36 ± 0.08 ) ng/L; groupA:IL-10:(5.32±1.10) ng/L,(7.56 ± 1.36) ng/L,(8.63 ± 2.21) ng/L vs (1.25 ± 0.03) ng/L; groupB:TNF-α:(3.43 ±0.06)ng/L,(5.24 ±2.10) ng/L,(7.68 ± 1.43) ng/L vs(2.22 ±0.15) ng/L;groupB:IL-6:(3.41 ±0.08 ) ng/L,(5.34 ± 1.34 ) ng/L,( 8.54 ± 2.03 ) ng/L vs ( 1.28 ± 0.04 ) ng/L; groupB:IL-10:( 7.28 ± 1.22 )ng/L,( 10.53 ± 2.14)ng/L,( 12.45 ± 2.03 )ng/L vs( 1.31 ± 0.04)ng/L,P ＜ 0.05 ].And there was significant difference on TNF-α,IL-6 and IL-10 between group A and group B( F =7.889,3.554,5.443,respectively,P ＜0.05).Conclusion Compared with general anesthesia group,combined general and epidural anesthesia group can ensure hemodynamic stability of elderly patients during peroperative period very well and can reduce the releasing of inflammatory cytokins,it is a viable and an ideal method. Key words: General anesthesia; Epidural blockade; Hemodynamic; Inflammatory cytokines

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of anesthesia methods on the success of urethral access and stone access achievement in endoscopic treatment of urolithiasis. In this prospective randomized study, 105 patients who underwent primary ureterorenoscopy (URS) procedure for ureteral stones were evaluated. The patients were randomized into three groups by permuted block randomization according to the applied anesthesia method: General anesthesia (GA): 33 patients, Spinal anesthesia (SA): 31 patients, and Epidural anesthesia (EA): 31 patients. Ten patients, whose ureteral access was not successful, were dropped out. The success of the three anesthesia methods on the success of the ureter access and its effects on surgical outcomes were compared. There was no statistically significant difference among the three groups in terms of the demographic values and preoperative features except the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status. Dilatation and the access time to stone were statistically significantly longer in SA and EA group compared to the GA group. There was no statistically significant difference among the groups in terms of operation, lithotripsy time, stone-free rate (SFR), and complication rates. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores in the 8th and 24th hours were statistically significantly higher in the GA group. In patients who decided to undergo primary ureterorenoscopy procedure, it can be suggested to treat with GA to provide a better relaxation of the ureter if there are no contraindications.

Background: Current guidelines recommend regional anesthesia versus general as a method of choice for women undergoing cesarean deliveries (CS). However, little is known about the surgical times in the operating room and a choice of anesthesia for cesarean deliveries. Objective: This study was designed to compare times from the arrival to the OR to the delivery of the fetus between regional and general anesthesia along with maternal and fetal outcomes, for patients undergoing cesarean sections for non-reassuring fetal tracing. Study Design: Records were reviewed for patients who underwent cesarean delivery for non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracing from February 2012 to May 2018. A total of 190 charts were selected. Seven patients who received epidural or spinal anesthesia and then converted to general anesthesia (GA) were excluded. The primary outcomes were: 1) entering the operating room to skin incision (min); 2) the time from entering the operating room to delivery of the fetus (min). These times were compared among the patients who underwent epidural, spinal and general anesthesia. The secondary criteria included time from skin incision to delivery of the fetus (min), estimated blood loss (ml), Apgars scores, Arterial/venous cord pH, NICU admissions and fetal complications. ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis Test was used for the continuous variable and Fisher’s exact test was used for the categorical variable to test the differences between groups. Logistic regression model was used for the binary outcomes after adjusting for age, BMI and number of prior laparotomies. Results: Infants in the GA group were delivered significantly faster when compared to epidural and spinal group separately with a P-value of 0.001. The mean time from arrival to OR to delivery of the newborn in GA group was 12.7 minutes, compared to 27 minutes in epidural group and 32.7 minutes in the spinal group. Time intervals from time in the OR to incision and time from incision to delivery of the fetus were also calculated and were significantly shorter in the GA group when compared to spinal and epidural groups, P < 0.001. The estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar between these three groups. Both arterial and venous umbilical cord mean PH were comparable in GA, spinal and epidural groups. Potential complications of GA include 36% of newborns had an Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 minute in GA group when compared to 15% of newborns in the epidural group, and 22% of newborns in the spinal group, which was not statistically significant. When comparing the NICU admission between the groups: 77% of newborns delivered under GA required NICU admission, 54% of the newborns delivered via epidural anesthesia were admitted versus 50% of newborns delivered via spinal anesthesia. Conclusion: The induction of general anesthesia for emergency cesarean section resulted in shorter times to delivery compared to spinal and epidural. General anesthesia was associated with lower, albeit not statistically significant Apgar scores and higher NICU admissions, and had similar cord gases compared to neuraxial anesthesia group.

This study evaluates the influence of general anesthesia (GA) and spinal anesthesia (SA) on physiological and oxidative stress in parturients undergoing elective cesarean section, one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures worldwide. A total of 101 pregnant women were included, categorized into GA (n = 51) and SA (n = 50) groups. Blood samples were collected at three time points: one hour before surgery (Measurement 1), at umbilical cord clamping (Measurement 2), and two hours post-surgery (Measurement 3). Biomarkers of oxidative stress, complete blood count, and levels of biochemical parameters were measured. In second and/or third measurement, biochemical blood analysis showed increased prolactin and cortisol levels, followed by spike of glucose and insulin in the GA group. However, levels of tri-iodothyronine were reduced in both groups in the third measurement. Glutathione S-transferase (GST) activity was increased in both groups in third measurement. The results showed increased concentrations of total SH groups and decreased concentrations of non-protein SH groups in the GA group during Measurement 2. Lymphocyte count was found to be predictor of GST levels. The results indicate more a pronounced endocrine response in GA group and speak in favor of spinal anesthesia. Both kinds of anesthesia are equally safe in terms of the oxidative status of the tissue.

Background &Aims:Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is conventionally performed under general anaesthesia (GA). As with any day care procedure, LC requires an anaesthetic technique which provides rapid recovery and fewer side effects. Neuraxial techniques resulted in decreased morbidity and mortality. Theaimofthestudywasto comparethe time and haemodynamic changes of spinal with GA.Methods:Following approval by the institutional ethical committee, registering in CTRI (CTRI/2021/04/032586 ) and after taking patient consent ,a controlled ,prospective, randomised trial of 70 patients with symptomatic gallstone disease and American Society of Anesthesiologists status I or II were operated for LC under spinal (n=35) or GA (n=35)between the academic years 2020 and 2021. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 25.0. Time taken for both groups were compared. Haemodynamic parameters were recorded to find theincidence of hypotension and bradycardia.Results:All the procedures were completed by the allocated method of anaesthesia and there were no conversions from spinal to GA. The incidences of hypotension(p=0.742) and bradycardia (P=0.163) were 17% and 11.4% in SA group and 14% and 2.8% in GA group respectively and no significant difference were observed. The total time taken in SA group was significantly less than in GA group; 38.9 9.64 versus 46.79.487 respectively (P=0.0011).Conclusion:LC done under spinal anaesthesia is safe and less time consuming. Spinal anaesthesia can berecommended as the technique of choice for LC in developing countries where time and cost can be saved.

Objective: Surgical trauma causes serious neuroendocrine and cytokine activity. In addition, the free oxygen radicals formed because of the ischemia/reperfusion injury resulting from applying and releasing the tourniquet (TQ) cause oxidative stress. Thiol and disulfide are among the new oxidative stress parameters used reliably in recent years. The aim of this study was to compare thiol-disulfide balance in general and spinal anesthesia, which are frequently used in total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. Methods: Fifty six patients aged 60-74 years scheduled to undergo TKR were randomly allocated to the general anesthesia (n=26) and spinal anesthesia (n=30) groups. The tourniquet (TQ) was applied for the TKR procedure after collecting a preanesthetic blood sample (T1). Blood samples were also collected at 5 minutes (T2) and 40 minutes (T3) after TQ release and at postoperative 24 hours (T4) to analyze native thiol, total thiol, disulfide, disulfide/native thiol ratio, disulfide/total thiol ratio, and native thiol/total thiol ratio. All patients had intravenous patient-controlled analgesia during the postoperative period. Mean arterial pressure, TQ times, and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were recorded. Decrease in thiol and increase in disulfide in the thiol-disulfide balance were recorded as oxidative stress indicators. Results: There was no difference between the groups in terms of VAS and analgesic consumption at the end of 24 hours. The general anesthesia group had higher native thiol, total thiol, and native thiol/total thiol ratio and lower disulfide, disulfide/native thiol ratio, and disulfide/total thiol ratio at all time points compared to the spinal anesthesia group. Conclusion: Assessment in terms of thiol-disulfide balance suggests that general anesthesia had a favorable effect on oxidative stress. Keywords: General anesthesia, oxidative stress, spinal anesthesia, thiol-disulfide, tourniquet time, visual analogue scale

Background: Neuraxial anesthesia is preferred anesthesia technique for cesarean section. But recently the safety of general anesthesia improved well. So it is important to clarify the safety of general anesthesia and neuraxial anesthesia for cesarean section. Methods: We searched CENTRAL/Ovid (September, 2016), EMBASE/Ovid (1974 to October 12, 2016), MEDLINE/Ovid (1946 to October 12, 2016). We only included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared general anesthesia versus neuraxial anesthesia including spinal anesthesia, epidural anesthesia or combined spinal and epidural anesthesia in cesarean section. Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, extracted the data and performed the analysis. Results: A total of 1394 mothers were involved in the 15 included studies. For neonatal outcomes, at 1 minute after delivery, Apgar score was significantly lower in maternal general anesthesia group (mean difference[MD] -0.71, 95% confidence intervals [CI] -0.99 to -0.43) and the risk of newborns for Apgar score lower than 7 was higher when the mother underwent general anesthesia (risk ratio [RR] 4.81, 95% CI 1.72 to 13.46). At 5 minutes after delivery, Apgar score was still lower in maternal general anesthesia group (MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.02), but the risk of newborns for Apgar score lower than 7 showed no difference in statistical analysis under general or neuraxial anesthesia (RR 2.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 64.48). Besides, no neonatal deaths were reported, and risk of oxygen by mask or intubation (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.53) also showed no difference in statistical analysis in both groups. For maternal outcomes, there were more blood loss in general anesthesia group (MD 75.8, 95% CI 21.18 to 130.41), but the risk of receiving postoperative blood transfusion was similar in both groups (RR 2.85, 95% CI 0.93 to 8.72). Besides, the risk of shivering (RR 8.00, 95% CI 1.14 to 56.33), nausea (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.17) and vomiting (RR 4.13, 95% CI 1.41 to 12.09) was higher in general anesthesia group. But the risk of headache (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.87) and pruritus (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.99) was higher in neuraxial anesthesia group. Conclusions: For clinical practice, we recommended neuraxial anesthesia as first choice in cesarean section. For further clinical researches, more non-surrogate outcomes should be reported, such as maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity. (Funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Science & Technology Department of Sichuan Province, China.) Citation: Lei Yang, Xu Cheng, Di Yang, Ru-Rong Wang. General versus neuraxial anesthesia in cesarean section: a systematic review. J Anesth Perioper Med 2017; 4: 114-22. doi:10.24015/JAPM.2017.0028 This is an open-access article, published by Evidence Based Communications (EBC). This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format for any lawful purpose. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.