Table 2.

Details of trials investigating general anesthesia's (GA's) potential toxicity.

First author/year	GA versus other techniques	Sample size	Pregnancy rates	Fertilization rate	Oocytes
Aghaamoo et al. 2014 [2]	GA versus spinal analgesia	164 total GA group (n = 83) Spinal group (n = 81)	Practicing spinal anesthesia is significantly related to increased chance of chemical pregnancy (p = 0.043)	—	—
Azmude et al. 2013 [1]	GA versus spinal anesthesia	200 total GA group (n = 100) Spinal group (n = 100)	Spinal anesthesia increased significantly the chance of IVF success (p < 0.001)	—	—
Wilhelm et al. 2002 [6]	GA versus monitored anesthesia care (MAC) with remifentanil	251 total GA group (n = 132) MAC group (n = 119)	MAC had a greater pregnancy rate (p < 0.05)	NS	NS
Hammadeh et al. 1999 [8]	GA versus sedation	202 total GA group (n = 106) Sedation group (n = 96)	NS	NS	The number of collected oocytes was significantly higher with GA (p < 0.0001)
Christiaens et al. 1998 [7]	GA versus paracervical local anesthetic block (PCB)	202 total GA group (n = 101) PCB group (n = 101)	NS	NS	NS

NS: no significant difference, —: not under investigation.