BACKGROUND: Epidural anesthesia (EA) was a commonly used technique for a Cesarean section. Recently, because of the availability of non-cutting fine spinal needles, spinal anesthesia (SA) has gained an increase in interest. This study was performed to compare SA and EA for an elective Cesarean section and to investigate the efficacy of SA. METHODS: Twenty healthy parturients were divided into two groups. Patients in the SA group (n = 10) were given 8 10 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.15 mg morphine intrathecally. Patients in the EA group (n = 10) received 20-22 ml of 2% lidocaine mixed with 1.5 mg morphine and 0.1 mg epinephrine. Time to start of operation, analgesic effects and side effects were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The time to reach the maximal level of sensory blockade and the time intervals to start the operation after an anesthetic injection were significantly shorter in the SA group (P<0.001, both). Incidence of hypotension was significantly higher in the SA group (P<0.05) and all of them improved by intravenous ephedrine. Side effects and postoperative analgesia were not significantly different between the two groups except backache occured more often in the EA group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This data such as a greater time efficacy, similar analgesia and same incidences of side effects by morphine in the SA group, suggest that spinal anesthesia is a useful anesthetic method for a Cesarean section.