Anesthetic Management of Pregnant Patients with Appendectomy
Anesthetic Management of Pregnant Patients with Appendectomy
Yazar: Celik, Feyzi; Oguz, Abdullah; Yildirim, Zeynep Baysal; Guzel, Abdulmenap; Dogan, Erdal; Ciftci, Taner; Aycan, İlker Onguc
Dergi: Journal Of International Dental And Medical Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2014
Anahtar kelimeler: General Anesthesia, Spinal Anesthesia, Pregnant Women, Acute Appendicitis.

Our goal was to present our anesthesia procedure of pre-diagnosis and laparotomy on pregnant patients with acute appendicitis. After approval Ethics Committee, 77 pregnant patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis were evaluated. Patients were separated into two groups: group G (general anesthesia) and Group S (spinal anesthesia), according to the method of anesthesia applied. The patients' age, gestational age, method of anesthesia applied, duration of hospital stay, duration of anesthesia, number of pregnancies, leukocyte count and complications suffered were compared between the groups. After the surgery, with regular and adequate spontaneous respiration, protective airway reflexes present, and with vital parameters normal and within clinical limits, the patients were sent for internal evaluations. The demographic information of the cases is shown in table 1. In comparing the groups, the hospital stay duration of group S was significantly short. Looking at the incisions made for the surgical procedures, in group S relative to the pararectal incision average, the McBurney incision average was greater. In group G, the number of perforated appendicitis cases was higher. The anesthesia duration was short to a significant degree in group S. In order to protect the mother and baby from the negative effects of general anesthesia, as well as to lower costs by decreasing the duration of stay in the hospital, the spinal anesthesia technique could be a preferable procedure for selected pregnant acute appendicitis patients. G: general anesthesia, S: spinal anesthesia. Clinical article (J Int Dent Med Res 2013; 6: (2), pp. 92-95)

Our goal was to present our anesthesia procedure of pre-diagnosis and laparotomy on pregnant patients with acute appendicitis. After approval Ethics Committee, 77 pregnant patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis were evaluated. Patients were separated into two groups: group G (general anesthesia) and Group S (spinal anesthesia), according to the method of anesthesia applied. The patients' age, gestational age, method of anesthesia applied, duration of hospital stay, duration of anesthesia, number of pregnancies, leukocyte count and complications suffered were compared between the groups. After the surgery, with regular and adequate spontaneous respiration, protective airway reflexes present, and with vital parameters normal and within clinical limits, the patients were sent for internal evaluations. The demographic information of the cases is shown in table 1. In comparing the groups, the hospital stay duration of group S was significantly short. Looking at the incisions made for the surgical procedures, in group S relative to the pararectal incision average, the McBurney incision average was greater. In group G, the number of perforated appendicitis cases was higher. The anesthesia duration was short to a significant degree in group S. In order to protect the mother and baby from the negative effects of general anesthesia, as well as to lower costs by decreasing the duration of stay in the hospital, the spinal anesthesia technique could be a preferable procedure for selected pregnant acute appendicitis patients. G: general anesthesia, S: spinal anesthesia. Clinical article (J Int Dent Med Res 2013; 6: (2), pp. 92-95)