ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Eclampsia is still associated with high maternal and perinatal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, especially in resource poor countries with limited access to perinatal and critical care facilities. The ideal method of anaesthesia for caesarean section in eclamptics is not generally agreed upon. METHODS: Review of the patients' case notes as well as records of the institution's Labour Ward Theatre, Intensive Care Unit and Postnatal Ward was carried out between January 2011 and December 2012. Patients' clinical and demographic data, anaesthetic management methods, maternal and perinatal outcome measures were evaluated and analysed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine cases of eclampsia were reviewed, of which 87 had Caesarean section. After excluding five patients who had intercurrent medical ailments, 82 patients were finally analyzed. Of these, 65 (79.3%) had spinal anaesthesia while 17 (20.7%) had general anaesthesia. Out of the 19 (23.2%) who were transferred to the intensive care unit, 12 (70.6%) had general anaesthesia while 7 (10.8%) had spinal anaesthesia. Of the 17 patients who had general anaesthesia, 10 (58.8%) were ventilated post operatively versus only 2 (3.1%) in spinal anaesthesia. Nine of the 17 general anaesthesia patients (52.9%) versus only 1 of 65 spinal anaesthesia (1.5%) died in ICU. Apgar was two fold better in the spinal anaesthesia group at 5 minutes.There was a higher risk ratio for stillbirths in the general anaesthesia patients. CONCLUSION: maternal and perinatal survival and well being are better in eclamptics who had spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section compared to those who had general anaesthesia.
