A comparison of epidural analgesia with 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor

We previously found that the extent of an epidural motor block produced by 0.125% ropivacaine was clinically indistinguishable from 0.125% bupivacaine in laboring patients. By adding fentanyl to the 0. 125% ropivacaine and bupivacaine solutions in an attempt to reduce hourly local anesthetic requirements, we hypothesized that differences in motor block produced by the two drugs may become apparent. Fifty laboring women were randomized to receive either 0. 125% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg/mL or an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with settings of: 6-mL/hr basal rate, 5-mL bolus, 10-min lockout, 30-mL/h dose limit. Analgesia, local anesthetic use, motor block, patient satisfaction, and side effects were assessed until the time of delivery. No differences in verbal pain scores, local anesthetic use, patient satisfaction, or side effects between groups were observed; however, patients administered ropivacaine/fentanyl developed significantly less motor block than patients administered bupivacaine/fentanyl. Ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar labor analgesia with significantly less motor block than an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the PCEA technique remains to be determined. Implications: By using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique, ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar analgesia with significantly less motor block than a similar concentration of bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique remains to be determined.     

Continuous infusion epidural analgesia in labor: the effect of adding sufentanil to 0.125% bupivacaine

The purpose of this study was to determine if the addition of sufentanil would improve the quality of analgesia obtained with 0.125% epidural bupivacaine infusions given to women in active labor. Forty healthy laboring women were randomly assigned to two equal groups. Group 1 had epidural analgesia instituted with the bolus injection of 10-15 ml 0.125% bupivacaine containing sufentanil 2 micrograms/ml, followed 30 minutes later by initiation of an epidural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine containing sufentanil 1 microgram/ml at a rate of 10 ml/hr. Group 2 had epidural analgesia instituted with 10 or 15 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine with an epidural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine begun 30 minutes later at a rate of 10 ml/hr. Infusion rates were altered as required to maintain an analgesic level to the tenth thoracic dermatome. Analgesia assessed by visual analog pain scores was significantly better in group 1. Significantly fewer epidural injections were required in group 1, and less motor weakness occurred in these patients. The addition of sufentanil to epidural bupivacaine infusions given in labor improves analgesia and reduces "top-up" requirements.     

A comparison of 0.0625% bupivacaine with fentanyl and 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl for continuous epidural labor analgesia

We compared the analgesic efficacy and the degree of motor block achieved with epidural infusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine (Group B) versus 0.1% ropivacaine (Group R), both with 0.0002% fentanyl (2 microg/mL) in laboring patients. A prospective, double-blinded study was performed in 98 ASA physical status I-II parturients who were divided randomly into two groups to receive either bupivacaine or ropivacaine after catheter location had been tested with an initial bolus of lidocaine and fentanyl. The infusion rate was 15 mL/h in every case. When pain was perceived, 5-mL boluses of the assigned epidural analgesic were administered every 10 min until analgesia was achieved. We recorded pain intensity, level of sensory block, degree of motor block, hemodynamic variables, secondary effects, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome, and patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the factors analyzed. Highly effective analgesia was achieved in both groups with a small incidence of motor block. These findings suggest that bupivacaine may be more potent than ropivacaine. IMPLICATIONS: We compared different concentrations of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine thought to be equipotent. Both solutions were equally efficient in providing highly effective epidural analgesia for labor with minimal motor block. These findings suggest that bupivacaine may be more potent than ropivacaine.     

Continuous infusion epidural analgesia during labor: a randomized, double-blind comparison of 0.0625% bupivacaine/0.0002% fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine

The analgesic efficacy of the continuous epidural infusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine/0.0002% fentanyl was compared with the infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine alone in a randomized, double-blind study of nulliparous women. Each patient received, in sequence: 1) 3 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine; 2) 6 ml of study solution 1 (bupivacaine-fentanyl group: 0.125% bupivacaine/0.0008% fentanyl; bupivacaine-only group: 0.25% bupivacaine alone); and 3) a continuous epidural infusion of study solution 2 at a rate of 12.5 ml/h (bupivacaine-fentanyl group: 0.0625% bupivacaine/0.0002% fentanyl; bupivacaine-only group: 0.125% bupivacaine alone). The epidural infusion was discontinued at full cervical dilatation, but patients who lacked perineal anesthesia received one or two 5-ml boluses of study solution 3 (bupivacaine-fentanyl group: 0.0625% bupivacaine alone; bupivacaine-only group: 0.125% bupivacaine alone). During the first stage of labor, 36 of 41 (88%) women in the bupivacaine-fentanyl group, and 37 of 39 (95%) women in the bupivacaine-only group, had analgesia of excellent or good quality (P = NS). During the second stage, 22 of 37 (59%) women in the bupivacaine-fentanyl group, and 23 of 35 (66%) women in the bupivacaine-only group, rated their analgesia as excellent or good (P = NS). Women in the bupivacaine-only group were more likely to have motor block at full cervical dilatation (P less than .001). There was no significant difference between groups in duration of the second stage of labor, duration of pushing, position of the vertex before delivery, method of delivery, Apgar scores, or umbilical cord blood gas and acid-base values.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

0.15%罗哌卡因与0.1%罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼硬膜外分娩镇痛的比较

目的比较单用0.15%罗哌卡因与0.1%罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼在硬膜外分娩镇痛的效果和不良反应。方法选择足月单胎初产妇257例,年龄18～40岁,BMI 18～35 kg/m~2,随机分为两组,分别采用0.1%罗哌卡因+舒芬太尼0.5μg/ml(A组,n=129)和0.15%罗哌卡因(B组,n=128)行硬膜外分娩镇痛。观察分娩镇痛前、硬膜外给药20 min后和产程中最大VAS疼痛评分,记录镇痛泵按压次数、补救镇痛次数、镇痛药物用量、改良Bromage评分、满意度、产程时间、分娩方式,新生儿出生后1 min和5 min的Apgar评分,记录镇痛期间皮肤瘙痒、恶心呕吐、尿潴留、产时发热等不良反应发生情况。结果两组在硬膜外给药20 min后和产程中最大VAS评分均明显低于分娩镇痛前(P0.05),但两组差异无统计学意义。两组镇痛泵按压次数、补救镇痛次数、麻醉药物用量、改良Bromage评分、满意度差异无统计学意义。两组产程时间、分娩方式、新生儿出生后1 min和5 min的Apgar评分差异无统计学意义。A组有10例(7.8%)皮肤瘙痒,而B组无一例皮肤瘙痒(P0.05)。两组恶心呕吐、尿潴留、产时发热发生率差异无统计学意义。结论单用0.15%罗哌卡因与0.1%罗哌卡因复合5μg/ml舒芬太尼对初产妇硬膜外分娩镇痛效果相当,但单用罗哌卡因时皮肤瘙痒发生率明显降低。     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor pain: effect on labor, delivery and neonatal outcome of 0.125% bupivacaine vs 0.2% ropivacaine

The objective was to evaluate the influence of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using low doses of bupivacaine vs. ropivacaine, on labor pain, motor blockade, progression of labor, delivery and neonatal outcome. This randomized double blind study included 565 parturients. All received a 5-mL/h infusion and PCEA (5-mL boluses with a 20-min lockout, maximum volume 20 mL/h) of either 0.125% bupivacaine (n = 313: 165 nulliparous, 148 parous) or 0.2% ropivacaine (n = 252: 113 nulliparous, 139 parous). Pain score, lower limb motor block, sensory levels, local analgesic doses required, hemodynamic parameters, side effects and complications were assessed. Obstetric variables included cervical dilation at epidural insertion, incidence of ruptured membranes and their duration, use of oxytocin, fetal heart rate changes, duration of labor, mode and outcome of delivery, and use of invasive and non-invasive fetal monitoring. Neonatal characteristics included birth weight, Apgar scores, umbilical artery pH, serum bilirubin, hypoglycemia, need for assisted ventilation, sepsis or sepsis study, feeding difficulties and respiratory distress syndrome. Ropivacaine 0.2% was equianalgesic with 0.125% bupivacaine, but produced less motor block (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences, however, in duration of labor, delivery type or neonatal outcome.     

Postoperative epidural analgesia after total knee arthroplasty with sufentanil 1 microg/ml combined with ropivacaine 0.2%, ropivacaine 0.125%, or levobupivacaine 0.125%: a randomized, double-blind comparison

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Total knee replacement is associated with severe postoperative pain that, if treated insufficiently, interferes with early rehabilitation. The purpose of the present study is to compare the efficacy of ropivacaine (0.2% and 0.125%) and levobupivacaine (0.125%), all in combination with sufentanil 1 microg/mL with regard to postoperative pain relief and absence of motor block in a patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting. METHODS: The study design was randomized and double-blind. Sixty-three patients scheduled for total knee replacement under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive ropivacaine 0.2%/sufentanil 1 microg/mL (group 1), ropivacaine 0.125%/sufentanil 1 microg/mL (group 2), or levobupivacaine 0.125%/sufentanil 1 microg/mL (group 3) for postoperative epidural pain relief. Primary endpoints were numerical rating scores for pain and patient satisfaction, motor block scores, time to first demand of the patient-controlled epidural analgesia device and average hourly consumption of local anesthetic and sufentanil. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 3 groups regarding numerical rating scores for pain, patient satisfaction, and motor block scores at any of the time intervals; time to first demand and average hourly sufentanil consumption were similar. Patients in group 1 used significantly more local anesthetic than patients in groups 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 solutions provided adequate analgesia and minimal motor block. The higher concentration of ropivacaine 0.2% was associated with a higher consumption of local anesthetic and did not result in a decrease in the consumption of sufentanil. Under the conditions of this study, patient-controlled epidural analgesia consumption of the epidural mixture was predominantly determined by sufentanil.     

The dose-range effects of sufentanil added to 0.125% bupivacaine on the quality of patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor

To determine the minimal sufentanil concentration required to improve the quality of patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor, we compared the efficacy of a combination of 0.125% bupivacaine with 1:800,000 epinephrine and different concentrations of sufentanil in a double-blinded randomized study. Concentrations were no sufentanil (n = 66), 0.078 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), 0.156 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), 0.312 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), and 0.468 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 67). The patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting was a 12-mL bolus dose and a 25-min lockout interval. Pain was scored at 5-6 cm, 7-8 cm, and full cervical dilation by using a 10-cm visual analog scale. At full cervical dilation, the pain scores were lower in the groups receiving a solution of at least 0.156 microg/mL sufentanil. Few differences were observed when using the larger concentrations, except for increased pruritus intensity. The duration of labor and the mode of delivery were similar in each group. Rescue analgesia, which consisted of 6 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine, was infrequent and comparable between groups. The use of the pump did not differ between groups. Adding a small concentration of sufentanil to 0.125% bupivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor improved the quality of analgesia but did not modify the bupivacaine requirement. Reducing the sufentanil concentrations to 0.156 microg/mL decreased the pruritus intensity without reducing analgesia. Implications: Adding a small concentration of sufentanil to 0.125% bupivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor improved the quality of analgesia but did not modify the bupivacaine requirement. Reducing the sufentanil concentrations to 0.156 microg/mL decreased the pruritus intensity without reducing analgesia.     

Comparison of 0.125% bupivacaine and 0.2% ropivacaine in obstetric analgesia

This comparative study of low doses of ropivacaine was conducted in order to identify the most effective form of analgesia during labour with the aid of supplementary low doses of fentanyl and clonidine. 60 ASA I and II parturient primipares who had asked for epidural analgesia were randomly assigned to two groups. Group R was given 5-7 ml 0.2% ropivacaine and Group B 0.125% bupivacaine with both groups receiving 75 ng clonidine and 50 ng fentanyl with their first bolus of local anaesthetic. The parameters measured included the speed and spread of the sensory blockade and the scale of any motor blockade. The material haemodynamics and VAS pain relief scores were also measured at 30-minute intervals during labour and all side-effects (nausea, vomiting, localised or generalised itching, headache etc) were also monitored. Apgar anaesthetics and other drugs was decided on the basis of the VAS score (a further dose was given to women with a VAS of > 3-4). The study was completed by a telephone interview 6 months after delivery and the data were analysed using the Student's t-test and the chi 2 test. The analgesic effect was satisfactory in both groups and no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups under most of the headings analysed, apart from the top-up doses needed to maintain adequate analgesia. The average time between the first VAS to parturition was 292 mns in Group B and 267 mns in Groups R. Top-up doses of local anaesthetic (2.35 vs 5.05) came on average to 15.8 ml in Group B compared to 24.1 ml in Group R. There were 20% Caesarian sections in Group R and 13.8% in Group B. Optimum analgesia was achieved in Group R, the level of analgesia was insufficient or barely sufficient in 3.3% of cases. There was no Apgar score < 7 in either group. It was therefore concluded that both bupivacaine and ropivacaine offer excellent analgesia during labour and have no significant side effects on mothers or babies.     

A double-blind comparison of 0.25% ropivacaine and 0.25% bupivacaine for extradural analgesia in labour

Ropivacaine is a new aminoamide local anaesthetic. Compared with bupivacaine, ropivacaine possesses a higher threshold for systemic toxicity and a high selectivity for sensory fibres. We have compared prospectively these two agents in a concentration of 0.25% for extradural analgesia in labour. A total of 104 parturients requesting extradural analgesia were randomized to receive either ropivacaine or bupivacaine. The women in the bupivacaine group required more top-up doses to maintain analgesia (median 3.0 vs 2.0) (P < 0.05). The onset of sensory block, quality of analgesia, ultimate level of maximum sensory block and maternal satisfaction were similar in both groups. The incidence, intensity and duration of motor block were slightly but not significantly less in the ropivacaine group. The ropivacaine group had a higher incidence of spontaneous vaginal delivery (70.59% vs 52.00%). There was no significant difference in neonatal outcome as assessed by Apgar scores, umbilical acid-base status and neurological and adaptive capacity score at 2 and 24 h after delivery. We conclude that ropivacaine and bupivacaine in a concentration of 0.25% produced comparable analgesia for pain relief of labour with no detectable adverse effect on the neonate.      

开胸手术后不同浓度舒芬太尼混合罗哌卡因病人自控硬膜外镇痛的效果

目的比较开胸手术后不同浓度舒芬太尼混合罗哌卡因病人自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA) 的效果。方法36例择期开胸行肺叶、食管及纵隔肿瘤切除术后的病人,ASAⅠ-Ⅲ级,年龄21-64 岁,体重42-79kg。随机分为3组(n=12),A、B、C组术后分别用0.4、0.5、0.6 μg/ml舒芬太尼混合0.125%罗哌卡因PCEA。分别于术后4、8、20、24、48 h记录VAS评分、镇痛药液用量、PCA的按压次数、生命体征(脉搏血氧饱和度、呼吸频率、心率及平均动脉压)、镇静及副作用(恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘙痒、胸闷等),并计算PCA按压次数比。结果术后48 h之内,C组VAS评分低于A、B组(P<0.05或0.01),B组实际PCA按压次数低于A组(P<0.05),C组镇痛药液用量、实际PCA按压次数低于A、B 组(P<0.05),PCA按压次数比高于A组(P<0.01)。术后生命体征平稳,镇静、恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘙痒及胸闷的发生率低。结论开胸手术后0.6 μg/ml舒芬太尼混合0.125%罗哌卡因PCEA镇痛效果最好,且不增加用药量及副作用。     

Ambulatory labor epidural analgesia: bupivacaine versus ropivacaine

Dilute concentrations of bupivacaine combined with fentanyl have recently been used to initiate labor epidural analgesia in an attempt to balance adequate analgesia and minimal maternal motor blockade. Similar concentrations of ropivacaine have not been evaluated. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was designed to compare the efficacy of 20 mL of either 0.08% bupivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl or 0.08% ropivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl to initiate ambulatory labor epidural analgesia. Forty nulliparous women in early ( 0 but < 20 at 20 min. The time (mean +/- SD) to visual analog scale score = 0 was BF (n = 18): 12.0 +/- 4.5 min and RF (n = 19): 12.4 +/- 4.0 min (P > 0.05). Spontaneous micturition was observed in 65% (13 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.01), and ambulation was demonstrated in 75% (15 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.03). The incidence of forceps delivery was 35% (7 of 20) BF compared with 10% (2 of 20) RF (P < 0.04). The results of this study indicate that dilute ropivacaine combined with fentanyl effectively initiates epidural analgesia while concurrently preserving maternal ability to void and ambulate. Implications: As compared with a similar dilute concentration of bupivacaine, 20 mL of dilute (0.08%) ropivacaine combined with fentanyl (2 microg/mL) effectively initiates epidural analgesia in nulliparous women in early, established labor while preserving their ability to micturate and ambulate. Of importance, it appears that a true ambulatory epidural analgesic for women in labor is now possible.     

Randomized controlled trial of patient-controlled epidural analgesia after orthopaedic surgery with sufentanil and ropivacaine 0.165% or levobupivacaine 0.125%

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine, and to a lesser extent also levobupivacaine, is commonly used for postoperative epidural analgesia. Despite ED50 data suggesting a potency difference between these drugs, clinically they can be difficult to distinguish. As a consequence, it is unclear which concentration of each drug to use when comparing them for long-term analgesia. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement were selected to participate in a double-blind randomized study comparing ropivacaine 0.165% with levobupivacaine 0.125% to which was added sufentanil 1 microg ml(-1) for postoperative analgesia by the epidural route. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) was offered for 48 h. After the first 24 h, the basal infusion was omitted. RESULTS: Pain scores both at rest and on mobilization were similar between both groups. The volume of local anaesthetic solution consumed during the first 48 h after surgery was 25% higher in those patients receiving ropivacaine (P=0.02). Patients receiving ropivacaine made a mean (SD) of 38.5 (16) PCEA demands in the first 48 h after surgery compared with 28 (13) in the levobupivacaine group (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Both local anaesthetics provided effective postoperative analgesia but, even in a 25% weaker concentration, a small volume of levobupivacaine and opiate substance was consumed. These differences may be explained by a potency difference or by the duration of action of levobupivacaine.     

等效浓度左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因硬膜外分娩镇痛质量的比较

目的 比较等效浓度的左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因硬膜外分娩镇痛质量.方法 选择自愿接受硬膜外分娩镇痛的初产妇120例,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级、头位、单胎、孕期≥36周,按双盲原则随机分为左旋布比卡因组(L组)和罗哌卡因组(R组),每组60例.镇痛液分别为0.125%左旋布比卡因或0.15%罗哌卡因复合2 μg/ml芬太尼.记录产妇的VAS评分、镇痛药用量、镇痛时间、补救措施次数、产程、分娩方式及恶心、呕吐等不良反应发生率.对镇痛不全/镇痛失败产妇进行Logistic回归分析,寻找影响镇痛质量的因素.结果 两组患者镇痛不全和镇痛失败共24例,合并后行Logistic回归分析发现影响镇痛质量的因素有首剂量后VAS评分≥30 mm、镇痛时间超过6 h、持续性枕后位.结论 0.125%左旋布比卡因与0.15罗哌卡因复合2 μg/ml芬太尼均可提供满意的硬膜外分娩镇痛效果.     

低浓度罗哌卡因和布比卡因分娩镇痛的临床研究

目的 对比低浓度罗哌卡因和布比卡因自控硬膜外分娩镇痛（ＰＣＥＡ）的效果。方法 ５２例单胎初产妇随机分为０．１％罗哌卡因－芬太尼组和０．０７５％布比卡因－芬太尼组。采取双盲法进行视觉模拟镇痛评分（ＶＡＳ）和下肢运动神经阻滞评分（ＭＢＳ）。记录产程时间、生产方式、胎儿心率（ＦＨＲ）及新生儿ＳｐＯ２。结果 两组产妇分娩镇痛效果良好且无显著性差别（Ｐ〉０．０５）。罗哌卡因组和布比卡因组中无运动神经阻滞者分     

Comparison of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia during labor]

OBJECTIVES: To compare the analgesic efficacy and level of motor block using two local anesthetics, ropivacaine and bupivacaine, during labor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty nulliparous women were enrolled during labor after full-term pregnancies. They were randomly assigned to receive epidural analgesia with ropivacaine (group R) or bupivacaine (group B). Group R patients received 10 ml of 0.18% ropivacaine with 5 microgram/ml of fentanyl followed by continuous epidural infusion of 0.1% ropivacaine with 2 microgram/ml of fentanyl at a rate of 10 ml/h. Group B patients received 10 ml of 0.15% bupivacaine with 5 microgram/ml of fentanyl followed by continuous epidural perfusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine with 2 microgram/ml of fentanyl at the same rate. Pain intensity was assessed on a visual analog scale, motor blockade on a Bromage scale, and level of sensory block at different moments. We also recorded total doses of local anesthetic employed during continuous epidural infusion, manner of final delivery, Apgar score, degree of maternal satisfaction and side effects. RESULTS: The demographic and delivery characteristics were similar in both groups. We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups for level of motor blockade, which was nil for 29 patients (96.66%) in group R and 28 patients (93.33%) in group B. No differences in degree of pain or level of sensory block (T8-T10 in both groups) were observed.The total doses of local anesthetic used were similar at 23.7 +/- 11.6 mg in group R and 16.5 +/- 7.3 mg in group B (non-significant difference). Nor did we find differences in manner of delivery, neonatal Apgar scores, degree of maternal satisfaction or side effects. CONCLUSION: Ropivacaine and bupivacaine are equally effective for epidural analgesia during labor at the doses used and they do not cause a relevant level of motor blockade.     

Motor blockade is reduced with ropivacaine 0.125% for parturient-controlled epidural analgesia during labour

PURPOSE: To compare the effect on the incidence of motor block by reducing the concentration of ropivacaine from 0.2% to 0.125% in parturient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for labour. METHODS: Randomized, controlled and double-blind trial involving parturients in early labour who received demand-only PCEA regimen (bolus 5 ml, lockout 10 min, maximum volume per hour of 20 ml) with either 0.2% (R0.2 group, n = 25) or 0.125% (R0.125 group, n = 25) ropivacaine. Pain scores, the degree of motor block, the rate of drug consumption, the proportion of good to total PCEA demands and the overall satisfaction scores were documented. RESULTS: Fewer parturients in the R0.125 group had lower limb motor block (4 vs. 11, P<0.05) although the degree of block was mild in all the affected parturients. The ratio of good to total PCEA demands was more favourable in the R0.2% group (median 0.72 vs. 0.52, P<0.01) although the hourly rate of ropivacaine consumption, the degree of pain relief, the maternal-fetal outcome and the overall satisfaction scores were similar. CONCLUSION: Both ropivacaine 0.2% and 0.125% provided comparably effective analgesia but motor block occurred more commonly in the 0.2% group.     

Efficacy of ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and levobupivacaine for labor epidural analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare analgesic efficacy and intensity of motor block with continuous infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and levobupivacaine in combination with fentanyl for labor epidural analgesia. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Labor and delivery suite at Magee Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA. PATIENTS: 162 ASA physical status I and II, full-term, primiparous women. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received epidural labor analgesia. Epidural medication consisted of an initial bolus of 8 mL local anesthetic with fentanyl (100 microg) followed by an infusion at 12 mL/h of local anesthetic with 2 microg/mL fentanyl. Patients were allocated to one of three groups, as follows: group 1 received bolus and infusion of bupivacaine 0.125%, group 2 received bolus and infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125%, and group 3 received a bolus of ropivacaine 0.2% and infusion of ropivacaine 0.1%. MEASUREMENTS: Maternal vital signs, pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, sensory levels, and motor block (Bromage score) were recorded every hour. Duration of first and second stage of labor and mode of delivery were also recorded. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in pain VAS or Bromage motor scores among the three groups of patients at any of the measured time intervals. The time to achieve T10 sensory level and patient comfort was shorter in the ropivacaine (9.35 +/- 4.96 min) and levobupivacaine (9.56 +/- 4.71 min) groups than the bupivacaine (11.89 +/- 7.76 min) group, although this difference did not reach a statistically significant level (P = 0.06). The second stage was significantly shorter in the bupivacaine group, lasting 81.27 +/- 63.3 min, compared with the ropivacaine group (121.69 +/- 86.5 min) and the levobupivacaine (115.5 +/- 83.6 minutes) group (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences in pain VAS and Bromage scores between 0.1% ropivacaine, 0.125% bupivacaine, and 0.1% levobupivacaine given for labor epidural analgesia.