
handle: 11392/523213
In this review the two techniques are compared concerning the perioperative mortality, especially in hip surgery, and the effects on neonates after cesarean section. Subsequently, the effects of both general and regional anaesthesia on cardiovascular and cerebral functions, immunocompetence and gastrointestinal complications are stressed considering surgery in both lower and upper part of the body. The meaning of 'stress-free anaesthesia' is discussed. At the present, there is no definitive evidence that either of the two techniques reduces perioperative mortality but regional anaesthesia seems to be better for neonates after cesarean section. The Authors suggest that there is now a better anaesthesia for every patient: the Anaesthetist should choose the best anaesthesia for each patient.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
