Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To trust that General Anaesthesia is safe?

77 replies

perceptionreality · 02/06/2012 22:33

A friend of mine is consumed by the idea that a GA is not as safe as we are told.

He says his mum is a nurse and has seen more than a few people die of a GA when they were otherwise healthy with low risk factors. He is adament that any procedure he has will be done with a local anaesthetic.

Personally, I'm glad he didn't say any of this before I had my operation a few weeks ago. Both times I had a GA I found it a pleasant experience in terms of immediately before and after.

And GAs are far more refined and modified than many years ago aren't they? What do you all think?

OP posts:
Gigondas · 02/06/2012 22:37

It depends on how healthy you are and skill of anaesthetist but I would say most people do come round. The after effects are quite nasty though.

emsyj · 02/06/2012 22:38

Well GAs are not 100% safe, people do die as a result - so YANBU to trust that they are safer than they used to be and that there are lots of well-trained folk who know their stuff administering GAs so that they are as safe as they can be, but YWBU to think they are totally without risk.

I would have thought that any procedure that could safely be done with a local anaesthetic would be done with one - as far as I know GA is only used where necessary, but I am not a medical professional and have no particular knowledge. Maybe someone wiser knows the answer.

LibrarianByDay · 02/06/2012 22:38

Any general anaesthetic carries risks with it. However, if larger numbers of people were dying on the operating table, I think we'd know about it.

DamnBamboo · 02/06/2012 22:39

It doesn't matter what people think does it.
You will get a whole bunch of opinions and most of it won't be based on fact so I wouldn't use this type of a forum to get any information on something like GAs.

To give you something completely anecdotal, I had one on Monday and here I am. Still alive and well.

Your friend may not have the choice of a local, depending on what it is he wants done. It doesn't always work like that.

AgentZigzag · 02/06/2012 22:39

I've been put under a few times and didn't really think about it not being safe, when you're in the situation where the alternative of not having one and being really ill, you tend to minimize the risk in your head.

Like you I found them to be pleasant experiences (as much as they can be), especially just before I went off when I once clearly remembered saying to the anaesthetist 'Woah, I feel really stoned Grinzzzzzz' Grin

workshy · 02/06/2012 22:40

General anaesthetic carries a risk

however it's not a huge risk and the monitoring of patients during an op has massively improved

I think it's worth considering having other types of anaesthetic but not everything can be done under local so it discount it is daft as surely in most cases the benefits of the op outweigh the risks of having a GA

DamnBamboo · 02/06/2012 22:40

Gigondas what you mean to say is the after effects can be quite nasty.

PomBearWithAnOFRS · 02/06/2012 22:41

Until I have to have one, I don't give it a thought. That said, they are "one of those things" where there is a small but real inherent risk of various complications. Most of the things we do in life have an element of risk to them though, even staying in bed all the time can be dangerous Grin - we have to weigh up the risks and benefits of everything we do and make a decision based on that.
It's his prerogative I guess, but there are certain things that need a GA rather than a local, and most emergency procedures seem to be done with GA. I bet he would have a GA rather than die from the lack of one if it came to it...

Original poster
perceptionreality · 02/06/2012 22:41

Oh, of course I know that they are not without risk. But if you are advised to have them for minor operations then surely the people involved in advising the operation have assessed the risk/benefit accordingly? And for plastic surgery which is non essential? Both of the anaesthetists I had were consultants and seemed very experienced - is this not always the case then??

I agree the after effects are not nice - I got very depressed both times.

OP posts:
NinthRoyalWave · 02/06/2012 22:42

I've had 5 altogether and they were all fine. The only bad side-effect I had was not being able to wee afterwards for a few hours Hmm but I came round from each one quickly with no problems.

I would NOT have liked to have a local for any of them - three ERPCs, gallbladder surgery and teeth removal

edam · 02/06/2012 22:42

we need the poster known as gasman on this thread.

Anaesthetists do generally try to keep their patients alive, if at all possible. GA is quite safe but all procedures carry risks.

hiveofbees · 02/06/2012 22:43

The risk of death in someone otherwise healthy is said to be 1 in every 100,000. But if your friend thinks that people are lying about the figures that probably isnt convincing.

DamnBamboo · 02/06/2012 22:44

They insisted on a GA for my procedure on Monday. We discussed me having a spinal but given what I was having done, it was a no go.

I knew that anyway, but not being an anaethetist, I thought I'd better check.

misslinnet · 02/06/2012 22:44

Well, there's always a very small risk of dying due to a bad reaction to the anaesthetic or suchlike. But I think it's around a 1 in 100,000 chance.
And I would agree that GAs have got safer since they were first introduced, because anaesthesists will know so much more about how they work and the possible complications.

You've got to weigh up the benefits of the operation against all the possible risks, and in most cases, the risk of dying from GA is less than the benefit gained from having the operation.

Follyfoot · 02/06/2012 22:46

She has seen 'more than a few people die of a GA'. Sorry, but I dont believe her.

Original poster
perceptionreality · 02/06/2012 22:46

Well personally, some procedures I had under local were actually quite traumatic and I would prefer to be asleep.

OP posts:
realhousewifeofdevoncounty · 02/06/2012 22:46

I have seen lots of procedures on many high risk patients and I personally have never seen any serious complications, let alone any deaths. That's not to say it doesn't happen, but it is rare. Just think how many ops take place under ga every day in an average busy hospital? I can understand why people get anxious though. I had an op recently and had an irrational fear that I wouldn't come round from the anaesthetic, even though I knew I was probably being a bit silly!

Shelly32 · 02/06/2012 22:48

I was worried sick when I was told that my 2 yr old needed one. Everyone on MN was supportive and reassuring. She was fine and I bet you anything, you will be too X

DamnBamboo · 02/06/2012 22:48

Thinking more about your OP, either your friend or his mother is probably lying.

realhousewifeofdevoncounty · 02/06/2012 22:48

And perception I also got very depressed and tearful! It is also worth noting that local anaesthetics like spinals/epidurals are not without risks either.

Devora · 02/06/2012 22:50

I love that anaesthetists call themselves gasmen Grin

GA is of course more risky than LA, so in general are not used unless there is a good reason to. This may not always be a clinical reason, of course. Early abortions, for example, were performed under GA for many years (still are) in order to minimise the woman's distress (during the procedure) and (some suspect) to make it quicker and easier for the surgical team (makes it possible for them to play the radio, chat to each other, do what they need to do to bond the team and keep up their spirits). In the US, by contrast, early termination was nearly always performed without GA.

For me it falls firmly into the category of things where i decide to place myself in the hands of the professionals, and trust them to make the right judgment for the situation.

DamnBamboo · 02/06/2012 22:51

Yes, 'tis true real I just get very sick after GAs and just didn't really fancy feeling nauseous for two days so asked about a spinal.

I'm a doctor, I knew they'd say no but I had to ask.

Buntingbunny · 02/06/2012 22:51

I had a very minor op on my hand and they gave me a GA which amazed me. Anaesthetist said I was way more likely to end up staying over night and having problems if she injected local into my arm.

DD2 has had both her arms set under GA. Neither of us felt in the least groggy afterwards.

Original poster
perceptionreality · 02/06/2012 22:52

I do hope so bamboo. We had a conversation where he asked how I was and I said I'd just had an operation. He said I was 'brave' to have had a GA(!) It's not like I had a choice anyway! He then went on to say that he had undergone plastic surgery on his ears with local anaesthetic - I thought he must have been mad!

OP posts:
anniemcphee · 02/06/2012 22:52

I have cared for hundreds of people having aneasthetics, and none died or had serious side effects.

Death is a risk, but it is a small risk, although the risk does increase with certain other health issues (obesity being one of them). But even then the risks are low.

The most common side effects are nausea and vomiting, and to be fair they are common with most mediactions.
General Aneasthetics are only given when a local can't be done, as it costs more to care for a patient who needs a general. They have to stay in hospital longer, given that those who have locals can usually leave after a set of obs.

I have had 2 anaesthetics myself and have lived to tell the tale.

Swipe left for the next trending thread