Abstract

Background: General or regional anaesthesia is used during caesarean sections. The ability to perform quick surgery in obstetric crises, as well as a loss of consciousness that assures reduced discomfort for expectant mothers, are two benefits of general anaesthesia.Aim: This paper aims to compare of Apgar Score in neonates born after spinal versus general anaesthesia. Patients and methods:  This paper was contributed to the study and analyse the comparison of the Apgar Score in neonates born after spinal versus general anaesthesia, where get on 84 patients, which include two groups. That the first group is the general anaesthesia group, with 20 cases, while the second group is spinal anaesthesia 64 patients. These cases were had patients from different hospitals in Iraq, between 27th March 2021 to 16th April 2022. Discussion: In this study, the proportion of participants receiving general anaesthetic as opposed to spinal anesthesia had 5-min Apgar scores > 8, which was substantially higher. Although the fetus has found anesthetic drugs well. As a result of a sympathetic blockade, regional anesthesia can be reduced. The total patients were got anesthetics that remain neonates with exposed to while also improving placental perfusion and fetal oxygenation where, that represent in our study, spinal more suitable than general anaesthesia.Conclusion:  General anaesthesia following caesarean section is associated with higher amounts of maternal blood loss as well as a larger proportion of infants with 5-min Apgar scores ≥ 8, compared to spinal anaesthesia. Moreover, the findings indicate that spinal anaesthesia produces significantly different infant Apgar score outcomes than general anaesthesia. Therefore, it may be concluded that the spinal anaesthesia approach has superior newborn outcomes over the general anaesthesia method based on the Apgar score measurement