Is combined spinal-epidural analgesia associated with more rapid cervical dilation in nulliparous patients when compared with conventional epidural analgesia?
(17/280)
BACKGROUND: The combined spinal-epidural technique provides rapid onset of labor analgesia and, anecdotally, is associated with labors of shorter duration. Epidural analgesia, by contrast, has been suggested to prolong labor modestly. It is unclear, however, whether more rapid cervical dilation in patients who receive combined spinal-epidural analgesia is a physiologic effect of the technique or an artifact of patient selection. The authors hypothesized that anesthetic technique may influence the rate of cervical dilation, and we compared the effects of combined spinalepidural with those of epidural analgesia on the rate of cervical dilation. METHODS: One hundred healthy nulliparous parturients in spontaneous labor with singleton, vertex, full-term fetuses were enrolled in a double-blinded manner when their cervical dilation was less than 5 cm. The patients were randomly assigned to receive analgesia via a standardized combined spinal-epidural (n = 50) or epidural (n = 50) technique. Data were collected on cervical dilation, pain, sensory level, and motor blockade. RESULTS: When regional analgesia was induced in comparable groups at a mean of 3 cm cervical dilation, the mean initial cervical dilation rates were significantly faster in the combined spinal-epidural group (mean values, 2.1 +/- 2.1 cm/h vs. 1 +/- 1 cm/h; P = 0.0008). Five parturients in the combined spinal-epidural group had a very rapid (> 5 cm/h) rate of mean initial cervical dilation, compared with none of the women in the epidural group. Overall mean cervical dilation rates in patients who achieved full cervical dilation were 2.3 +/- 2.6 cm/h and 1.3 +/- 0.71 cm/h (P = 0.0154) in the combined spinal-epidural and epidural groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy nulliparous parturients in early labor, combined spinal-epidural analgesia is associated with more rapid cervical dilation compared with epidural analgesia. Further study is needed to elicit the cause and overall effect of this difference. (+info)
Intrathecal neostigmine and sufentanil for early labor analgesia.
(18/280)
BACKGROUND: Recent efforts to improve the combined spinal epidural (CSE) technique have focused on adding opioids to other classes of analgesics. In this study, the authors used intrathecal neostigmine in combination with intrathecal sufentanil to investigate the usefulness of neostigmine for reducing side effects and prolonging the duration of sufentanil. METHODS: One hundred six healthy pregnant women in labor were enrolled in this study, which was divided into four phases. In all phases, patients received a CSE anesthetic while in the lateral position. In phase I, three groups of six women each received intrathecal neostigmine, 5, 10, or 20 microg, in an open-label, dose-escalating safety assessment. In phase II, 24 women received intrathecal sufentanil alone to establish an ED50 (dose that produces > 60 min of labor analgesia in 50% of patients). In phase III, an ED50 was established for sufentanil combined with a fixed dose of neostigmine (10 microg). In phase IV, 40 women received either twice the ED50 of sufentanil alone or twice the ED50 of sufentanil plus neostigmine, 10 microg. RESULTS: Neostigmine alone had no adverse effects on maternal vital signs, fetal heart rate, or Apgar scores. Neostigmine, 20 microg, produced analgesia in one patient and severe nausea and vomiting in another. The ED50 for intrathecal sufentanil alone was 4.1 +/- 0.31 microg, and the ED50 for intrathecal sufentanil combined with neostigmine, 10 microg, was 3.0 +/- 0.28 microg. The duration of analgesia and side effects from double these ED50s (sufentanil, 9 microg, or sufentanil, 6 microg, plus neostigmine, 10 microg) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 10-microg intrathecal neostigmine dose alone produced no analgesia or side effects, but reduced the ED50 of intrathecal sufentanil by approximately 25%. Additionally, doses approximately double these ED50s each produced a similar duration of analgesia and side effects, indicating intrathecal neostigmine shifts the dose-response curve for intrathecal sufentanil to the left. (+info)
Low-dose clonidine infusion during labour.
(19/280)
In this study, we have compared two different doses of clonidine (bolus of 25 micrograms and infusion of 19 micrograms h-1; bolus of 50 micrograms and infusion of 37 micrograms h-1, both added to 0.03% bupivacaine) with a control group of 0.03% bupivacaine alone. The study was performed in a randomized, double-blind manner, and a total of 45 patients were studied. Both clonidine regimens resulted in marked local anaesthetic sparing, with no change in the quality of analgesia. There was no difference in the severity of lower limb motor weakness and no difference in maternal sedation, although only a small number of patients were studied. No adverse maternal haemodynamic effects were observed. The newborn infants were not sedated on delivery. The number of fetal cardiotocographic traces judged to be of concern was higher in both clonidine groups. However, this just failed to reach statistical significance (P = 0.055). (+info)
Comparison of 0.25% S(-)-bupivacaine with 0.25% RS-bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in labour.
(20/280)
We have compared the efficacy of 0.25% S(-)-bupivacaine with 0.25% RS-bupivacaine in providing epidural analgesia for labour in a randomized, multicentre, double-blind study. Analgesia was initiated with 10 ml of the study solution and maintained with 10-ml top-ups. We studied 137 women and treatments were found to be equivalent for onset, duration and quality of block. Median onset of pain relief was 12 min for both drugs and median duration was 49 (range 3-129) min and 51 (7-157) min for S(-)-bupivacaine and RS bupivacaine, respectively. The estimated treatment difference for duration of pain relief was -4 (90% CI -13, 6) min. Thirty patients failed to achieve pain relief after the first injection (20 patients after S(-)-bupivacaine and 10 after RS-bupivacaine; P = 0.039). However, median duration of pain relief from the first top-up was 82 (range 3-164) min for S(-)-bupivacaine and 76 (22-221) min for RS-bupivacaine. There were no significant differences in the quality of analgesia, as assessed by the investigators. There were no significant differences in the extent of sensory block, percentage of patients with motor block or incidence of adverse events. (+info)
Comparison of low-dose epidural with combined spinal-epidural analgesia for labour.
(21/280)
We have performed a randomized comparison of two low-dose epidural regimens for analgesia in labour, differing only in the manner in which initial analgesia was established. In the epidural (EPI) group, 484 women received a loading dose of 20 ml of 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 micrograms ml-1. In the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) group, 524 women received a spinal injection of plain bupivacaine 2.5 mg with fentanyl 25 micrograms. In both groups, these initial doses were followed by 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 micrograms ml-1 infused at a rate of 12 ml h-1, with 20-ml top-ups for breakthrough pain. The groups were compared for midwife assessment of analgesic efficacy, delivery mode, patient assessments of first stage analgesia, second stage analgesia, overall analgesia, motor block and complications. Midwives, who were not blinded to the treatment groups, assessed 61.6% of CSE as providing 'excellent' analgesia compared with 56.4% of epidurals (P = 0.02). Patients assessed overall analgesia as 'excellent' in 74.8% of CSE compared with 71.7% of epidurals (P = 0.14). Other comparisons between groups revealed no differences. These findings may have been affected by an uneven distribution of multiparous women between the groups (25% in the EPI group and 34.2% in the CSE group; P = 0.002). However, subgroup analysis of primiparous and multiparous women did not alter the results. (+info)
Low-dose clonidine and neostigmine prolong the duration of intrathecal bupivacaine-fentanyl for labor analgesia.
(22/280)
BACKGROUND: Intrathecal (IT) opioid and local anesthetic combinations are popular for labor analgesia because of rapid, effective pain relief, but the duration of analgesia is limited. This study was undertaken to determine whether the addition of clonidine and neostigmine to IT bupivacaine-fentanyl would increase the duration of analgesia without increasing side effects for patients in labor. METHODS: Forty-five healthy parturients in active labor were randomized to receive a 2-ml IT dose of one of the following dextrose-containing solutions using the combined spinal-epidural technique: (1) bupivacaine 2.5 mg and fentanyl 25 microg (BF); (2) BF plus clonidine 30 microg (BFC); or (3) BFC plus neostigmine 10 microg (BFCN). Pain, sensory levels, motor block, side effects, maternal vital signs, and fetal heart rate were systematically assessed. RESULTS: Patients administered BFCN had significantly longer analgesia (165+/-32 min) than those who received BF (90+/-21 min; P<0.001) or BFC (123+/-21 min; P<0.001). Pain scores, block characteristics, maternal vital signs, Apgar scores, maternal satisfaction, and side effects were similar among groups except for nausea, which was significantly greater in the BFCN group (P<0.05 as compared with BFC). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of clonidine and neostigmine significantly increased the duration of analgesia from IT bupivacaine-fentanyl during labor, but neostigmine caused more nausea. Although serious side effects were not observed in this study, safety must be further addressed before the routine use of multiple IT drugs is advocated. (+info)
Walking with labor epidural analgesia: the impact of bupivacaine concentration and a lidocaine-epinephrine test dose.
(23/280)
BACKGROUND: Regional analgesia techniques for labor that permit ambulation are popular among parturients. This study evaluated the influence of bupivacaine bolus concentration and a 3-ml 1.5% lidocaine-epinephrine test dose, on analgesic effectiveness and the ability to walk after block placement. METHODS: Using a randomized double-blind study design, epidural analgesia was initiated in 60 parturients undergoing labor as follows: Group TD/B.0625 received a 3-ml lidocaine-epinephrine test dose + 12 ml bupivacaine, 0.0625%; group TD/B.125 received a 3-ml test dose + 12 ml bupivacaine, 0.125%; group B.0625 received 15 ml bupivacaine, 0.0625% (no test dose); and group B.125 received 15 ml bupivacaine, 0.125% (no test dose). Initial boluses in all groups contained 10 microg sufentanil. Bupivacaine, 0.0625%, with 0.33 microg/ml sufentanil was infused throughout labor at 13.5-15 ml/h. Analgesia balance, proprioception, motor block, and patient ability to stand and walk were evaluated at various intervals. RESULTS: A bolus of 0.125% bupivacaine containing sufentanil, without a previous test dose, proved to be optimal with respect to analgesia and early ambulation. When a test dose was given before bupivacaine, 0.125%, fewer women walked within 1 h of block placement. Bupivacaine, 0.0625%, with sufentanil, with or without a test dose, provided inadequate analgesia, necessitating additional bupivacaine, which impaired the ability to walk. A high percentage of women in all groups (73-93%) walked at some stage during labor. CONCLUSIONS: Omitting a lidocaine-epinephrine test dose and using 0.125% bupivacaine for the initial bolus should permit ambulation in the early postblock period for most parturients who elect this option. (+info)
Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour: comparison of two doses of intrathecal bupivacaine with fentanyl.
(24/280)
We have compared intrathecal bupivacaine 1.25 mg and fentanyl 25 micrograms (group A) with bupivacaine 2.5 mg and fentanyl 25 micrograms (group B), for combined spinal-epidural analgesia in 49 labouring parturients in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Onset and quality of analgesia were similar in both groups, with median visual analogue scale pain scores of 0 achieved in 5-10 min. Median duration of analgesia was longer in group B (median 120 (range 90-120) min) compared with group A (75 (75-105) min) (P = 0.013). Median upper sensory level was higher in group B compared with group A at 15 min (T6-7 vs T11, P = 0.003) and at 30 min (T6 vs T11-12; P = 0.001). Motor block was greater in group B: seven patients had a modified Bromage score > or = 1 compared with none in group A at 15 min (P = 0.017). Group B also had a greater decrease in arterial pressure. Patient-midwife satisfaction scores and other side effects were similar. We conclude that intrathecal bupivacaine 1.25 mg with fentanyl 25 micrograms provided analgesia of similar onset and quality compared with bupivacaine 2.5 mg and fentanyl 25 micrograms. Although the duration of analgesia was shorter, the incidences of motor block and hypotension were less with the smaller dose. (+info)