Regional vs. Regional Anesthesia General Anesthesia in Gynecological Procedures: Comparative Analysis

• Autor(a) principal: Magalhães , Rodrigo Viana
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: Rêgo, Hosana Maria Araújo, Jaeger, Karine Nava, Cardoso , Jhoni Michael de Oliveira, Moura , Ileana Simone de Oliveira, Vieira, Glenda Luísa, Aguiar , Sara Maria Santiago de, Sommer, Paula, Schmidt, Arthur Cézar, Borba, Gimena de Lemos, Rosa, Victor Hugo Júlio da, Xavier , Thiago Antônio Rodrigues, Barros, Caroline Muniz, Bandeira , Thiago Maio, Noriega, Freddy Andres Moreno, Ramos , Pedro Henrique de Almeida
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Implantology and Health Sciences
• Texto Completo: https://bjihs.emnuvens.com.br/bjihs/article/view/1177
• topic: Anestesia; Procedimentos Ginecológicos; Tomada de Decisões Clínicas.; Anesthesia; Gynecological Procedures; Clinical Decision Making.

Objective: The aim of the article is to conduct a comparative review between regional and general anesthesia in gynecological procedures, exploring intraoperative risks, complications, patient satisfaction, and economic impacts. The goal is to provide a comprehensive analysis to guide clinical decision-making, considering both clinical and economic aspects in the choice of the most appropriate anesthetic modality. Introduction: The importance of choosing between regional and general anesthesia in gynecological procedures is emphasized. It underscores the complexity of the decision, considering risks, complications, and the need for a personalized approach. The significance of a comprehensive analysis is highlighted to guide clinical practices and promote informed decisions in the pursuit of safe and effective anesthesia. Methodology: An integrative review was conducted on the PubMed, Scielo, and BVS databases, using specific terms such as "Regional Anesthesia," "General Anesthesia," and "Gynecological Surgical Procedures." The use of boolean operators AND and OR was adopted to refine the search, aiming to identify relevant clinical studies, systematic reviews, integrative reviews, and meta-analyses, with priority given to original articles. Conclusion: The review highlights the complexity in choosing between regional and general anesthesia in gynecological procedures, emphasizing risks, patient satisfaction, and economic impacts. Flexibility in approach, effective communication, and strategies for financial optimization are crucial for patient-centered anesthesia practice. The ongoing pursuit of a balance between clinical efficacy and economic efficiency is fundamental to enhance the quality of anesthesia care.