Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread globally with the number of cases exceeding seventy million. Although trials on potential treatments of COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) are promising, the introduction of an effective therapeutic intervention seems elusive. In this review, we explored the potential therapeutic role of volatile anesthetics during mechanical ventilation in the late stages of the disease. COVID-19 is thought to hit the human body via five major mechanisms: direct viral damage, immune overactivation, capillary thrombosis, loss of alveolar capillary membrane integrity, and decreased tissue oxygenation. The overproduction of pro-inflammatory cytokines will eventually lead to the accumulation of inflammatory cells in the lungs, which will lead to ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation. Respiratory failure resulting from ARDS is thought to be the most common cause of death in COVID-19. The literature suggests that these effects could be directly countered by using volatile anesthetics for sedation. These agents possess multiple properties that affect viral replication, immunity, and coagulation. They also have proven benefits at the molecular, cellular, and tissue levels. Based on the comprehensive understanding of the literature, short-term sedation with volatile anesthetics may be beneficial in severe stages of COVID-19 ARDS and trials to study their effects should be encouraged.

Cesarean Section deliveries have seen a significant global rise over the past few decades, prompting closer examination of clinical practices that affect maternal and fetal outcomes. One such factor is the choice of anesthesia General Anesthesia (GA) versus Regional Anesthesia (RA), including spinal and epidural methods. This distinction can substantially influence immediate surgical risks, recovery time, neonatal health, and even long-term outcomes. This study employed a comparative statistical analysis based on 20 peer-reviewed studies published between 2019 and 2025. Inclusion criteria focused on observational, cohort, and meta-analytical research involving elective and emergency cesarean sections. Outcomes assessed included maternal hemodynamic stability, surgical duration, glycemic stress response, recovery time, and fetal Apgar scores, NICU admissions, and neurodevelopmental markers. Data were grouped by anesthesia type and analyzed using chi-square tests, t-tests, and odds ratios, with visualizations via forest plots and bar graphs. The analysis revealed that regional anesthesia (particularly spinal anesthesia) is consistently associated with better maternal outcomes, such as improved hemodynamic stability, reduced glycemic stress, and shorter recovery times. For fetal outcomes, regional anesthesia correlated with higher Apgar scores, lower NICU admissions, and fewer neurodevelopmental concerns. General anesthesia, while occasionally necessary for specific clinical cases (e.g., emergencies, contraindications to RA), showed a statistically significant increase in both maternal and neonatal complications in the pooled data (p < 0.05). Forest plots supported the reduced odds of adverse outcomes with RA in both maternal and fetal categories.This comparative review supports the clinical preference for regional anesthesia in cesarean deliveries, where feasible. While GA remains essential in specific contexts, RA offers improved safety profiles for both mother and child in most cases. Clinical decision-making should incorporate individualized risk assessments, and further research should address long-term maternal mental health and child development post-anesthesia.