Effect of General Anesthesia Versus Spinal Anesthesia on Blood Glucose Concentration in Non-Diabetic Patients Undergoing Elective Cesarean Section

Huda Emsaad AL-Harire

doi:10.33214/xjnvkr50

Effect of General Anesthesia Versus Spinal Anesthesia on Blood Glucose Concentration in Non-Diabetic Patients Undergoing Elective Cesarean Section

Authors

Huda Emsaad AL-Harire Derna University, Anesthesia Department, Faculty of Medicine, Derna, Libya Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33214/xjnvkr50

Keywords:

General anesthesia, Spinal anesthesia, Blood glucose, Cesarean section, Stress response

Abstract

Surgical procedures induce a physiological stress response, leading to increased secretion of catabolic hormones and a rise in blood glucose concentration. The type of anesthesia used may influence this response, impacting perioperative glucose regulation. This study aims to compare the effects of general anesthesia (GA) and spinal anesthesia (SA) on blood glucose levels in non-diabetic patients undergoing elective cesarean section. A prospective comparative study was conducted at Al Wahda Hospital, Derna, including 40 non-diabetic women scheduled for elective cesarean section. Patients were divided into two groups: GA (n=20) and SA (n=20). Blood glucose concentrations were measured at four time points: before induction (T1), after induction (T2), before the end of surgery (T3), and 30 minutes postoperatively (T4). Statistical analysis was performed using repeated measures ANOVA. Blood glucose levels increased significantly in both groups during surgery. However, the rise was more pronounced in the GA group compared to the SA group (p < 0.05). The difference became more evident at T3 and T4, where GA patients exhibited a significantly higher glucose concentration than those in the SA group. General anesthesia is associated with a greater increase in blood glucose concentration compared to spinal anesthesia in non-diabetic patients undergoing elective cesarean section. This suggests that spinal anesthesia may be a preferable option for better perioperative glucose control, potentially reducing the risk of complications related to hyperglycemia. Further research with larger sample sizes is recommended to validate these findings.

REFERENCES

Amiri, F., Ghomeishi, A., Aslani, S. M., Nesioonpour, S., & Adarvishi, S. (2014). Comparison of surgical stress responses during spinal and general anesthesia in curettage surgery. Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, 4(3). doi: 10.5812/aapm.20554.e20554

Anderson, R. E., Ehrenberg, J., Barr, G., et al. (2005). Effects of thoracic epidural analgesia on glucose homeostasis after cardiac surgery in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 22(7), 524–529. doi: 10.1017/s0265021505000906

Behdad, S., Mortazavizadeh, A., Ayatollahi, V., Khadiv, Z., & Khalilzadeh, S. (2014). The effects of propofol and isoflurane on blood glucose during abdominal hysterectomy in diabetic patients. Diabetes and Metabolism Journal, 38(4), 311–316. doi: 10.4093/dmj.2014.38.4.311

Bucklin, B. A., et al. (2005). Obstetric anesthesia workforce survey: twenty-year update. Anesthesiology (Philadelphia), 103(3), 645–653.

Demirbilek, S., Ganidağli, S., Aksoy, N., Becerik, C., & Baysal, Z. (2004). The effects of remifentanil and alfentanil-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) on the endocrine response to abdominal hysterectomy. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, 16(5), 358–363. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2003.10.002

Desborough, J. P. (2000). The stress response to trauma and surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 85(1), 109–117. doi: 10.1093/bja/85.1.109

Gandhi, G. Y., Nuttall, G. A., Abel, M. D., et al. (2005). Intraoperative hyperglycemia and perioperative outcomes in cardiac surgery patients. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 80(7), 862–866. doi: 10.4065/80.7.862

Geisser, W., Schreiber, M., Hofbauer, H., et al. (2003). Sevoflurane versus isoflurane—anaesthesia for lower abdominal surgery. Effects on perioperative glucose metabolism. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 47(2), 174–180. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00023.x

Gottschalk, A., Rink, B., Smektala, R., Piontek, A., Ellger, B., & Gottschalk, A. (2014). Spinal anesthesia protects against perioperative hyperglycemia in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, 26(6), 455–460. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2014.02.001

Hadimioglu, N., Ulugol, H., Akbas, H., Coskunfirat, N., Ertug, Z., & Dinckan, A. (2012). Combination of epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia attenuates stress response to renal transplantation surgery. Transplantation Proceedings, 44(10), 2949–2954. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.08.004

Heesen, M., Stewart, A., & Fernando, R. (2015). Vasopressors for the treatment of maternal hypotension following spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section: past, present and future. Anaesthesia, 70(3), 252–257.

Heng Sia, A. T., Tan, K. H., Sng, B. L., Lim, Y., Chan, E. S. Y., & Siddiqui, F. J. (2015). Hyperbaric versus plain bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 120(1), 132–140. doi: 10.1213/ane.0000000000000443

Reynolds, F. (2010). General anesthesia is unacceptable for elective cesarean section. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia, 19(2), 212–217.

Turina, M., Miller, F. N., Tucker, C. F., & Polk, H. C. (2006). Short-term hyperglycemia in surgical patients and a study of related cellular mechanisms. Annals of Surgery, 243(6), 845–853. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000220041.68156.67

Wong, C. A. (2010). General anesthesia is unacceptable for elective cesarean section. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia, 19(2), 209–212.

Downloads

Published

2025-04-10

Issue

Volume 1, No. 1, 2025

Section

Original Articles

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Emsaad AL-Harire , H. (2025). Effect of General Anesthesia Versus Spinal Anesthesia on Blood Glucose Concentration in Non-Diabetic Patients Undergoing Elective Cesarean Section. Libyan Journal of Life Sciences, 1(1), 23-28. https://doi.org/10.33214/xjnvkr50