Ropivacaine, 0.1%, plus sufentanil, 0.5 microg/ml, versus bupivacaine, 0.1%, plus sufentanil, 0.5 microg/ml, using patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor: a double-blind comparison

BACKGROUND: This study compared the administration of 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil with that of 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil via patient-controlled epidural analgesia route during labor. METHODS: Two hundred healthy pregnant women at term with a single fetus with a vertex fetal presentation were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil or 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia pump (5-ml bolus dose, 10-min locked-out period, no basal infusion). Pain score on a visual analog scale, Bromage score (0-3), level of sensory block, patient-controlled epidural analgesia ratio, drug use, supplemental boluses, and side effects were recorded at 30 min and then hourly. Mode of delivery, duration of first and second stages of labor, umbilical cord pH, Apgar scores of the newborn, and a measure of maternal satisfaction were recorded after delivery. RESULTS: No differences were seen between the two groups for pain scores on a visual analog scale during labor, volume of anesthetic solution used, mode of delivery, or side effects. Motor block during the first stage of labor was significantly less in the ropivacaine group than in the bupivacaine group (no motor block in 97.8 of patients vs. 88.3%, respectively; P < 0.01). Duration of the second stage of labor was shorter in the ropivacaine group (1.3 +/- 1.0 vs. 1.5 +/- 1.2 h [mean +/- SD]; P < 0.05). Maternal satisfaction was greater in the bupivacaine group (91 +/- 13 mm for contraction, 89 +/- 19 mm for delivery on a visual scale: 0 = not satisfied at all, 100 = fully satisfied) than in the ropivacaine group (84 +/- 21 and 80 +/- 25 mm; P < 0.0001). Patients in the ropivacaine group requested more supplemental boluses to achieve analgesia during the second stage of labor than those in the bupivacaine group (29.7 vs. 19.8%, respectively, requested one or more supplemental boluses; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Delivered as patient-controlled epidural analgesia, 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil produce less motor block but are clinically less potent than 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil.     

Background Infusion Is Not Beneficial during Labor Patient-controlled Analgesia with 0.1% Ropivacaine plus 0.5 μg/ml Sufentanil

Background: Although patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labor has been extensively studied in recent clinical trials, the role of a background infusion associated with self-administered boluses is still debated. The authors designed a study to assess whether the use of PCEA with or without background infusion could improve the comfort of parturients and their satisfaction during labor and delivery without affecting the total consumption of local anesthetics.

Methods: One hundred thirty-three laboring parturients requesting epidural analgesia administered via PCEA with a solution of 0.1% ropivacaine plus 0.5 [mu]g/ml sufentanil were randomly assigned to four groups, according to the rate of background infusion used (0, 3, 6, and 9 ml/h). Local anesthetic requirements, maternal satisfaction, verbal pain scores, incidence of side effects, and outcome of labor were compared among groups.

Results: Patient demographics, labor characteristics, side effects, and Apgar scores were similar in each group. No significant differences were observed between groups in verbal pain scores during labor, number of supplemental boluses, or maternal satisfaction. A significantly greater overall total drug consumption with a 6-ml/h or a 9-ml/h background infusion (74 and 78 ml, respectively) was observed in comparison with PCEA without a background infusion (55 ml). A similar relation was observed for hourly use during both the first and the second stage of labor.     

A Double-blind Comparison of 0.125% Ropivacaine with Sufentanil and 0.125% Bupivacaine with Sufentanil for Epidural Labor Analgesia

Background: This study intends to evaluate the benefits of the administration of intermittent bolus doses of ropivacaine (0.125%) compared with bupivacaine (0.125%) after addition of sufentanil for analgesia during labor.

Methods: One hundred thirty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2 parturients were studied. The 90 initial patients were assigned randomly to receive 10 ml bupivacaine, 0.125%, plus 7.5 [micro sign]g sufentanil (initial bupivacaine 0.125% group) or ropivacaine, 0.125%, plus 7.5 [micro sign]g sufentanil (ropivacaine 0.125% group). Forty additional patients were recruited and received 0.125% bupivacaine plus 7.5 [micro sign]g sufentanil (additional bupivacaine 0.125% group) or 0.100% bupivacaine plus 7.5 [micro sign]g sufentanil (additional bupivacaine 0.100% group). The duration of analgesia, visual analogue scores for pain, motor blockade (using a six-point modified Bromage scale), patient satisfaction scores, nausea, pruritus, heart rate, and blood pressure were recorded.

Results: Bupivacaine 0.125% and ropivacaine 0.125% coadministered with sufentanil provided rapid and complete analgesia. Onset of analgesia occurred after +/- 15 min and lasted +/- 90 min. After the third epidural injection, patients in the ropivacaine group experienced significantly less severe motor blockade than patients in the initial bupivacaine 0.125% group. At this point, 93% of the patients in the ropivacaine group were free from motor impairment versus 66% in the bupivacaine group (P < 0.05). Comparable levels of motor blockade were obtained in both additional groups. Patients' evaluation of their analgesia was worst in the bupivacaine 0.100% group.     

A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Bupivacaine with Ropivacaine for Labor Analgesia

Background: A meta-analysis of studies comparing high doses of bupivacaine with ropivacaine for labor pain found a higher incidence of forceps deliveries, motor block, and poorer neonatal outcome with bupivacaine. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in these outcomes when a low concentration of patient-controlled epidural bupivacaine combined with fentanyl is compared with ropivacaine combined with fentanyl.

Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, including term, nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor. For the initiation of analgesia, patients were randomized to receive either 15 ml bupivacaine, 0.1%, or 15 ml ropivacaine, 0.1%, each with 5 [mu]g/ml fentanyl. Analgesia was maintained with patient-controlled analgesia with either local anesthetic, 0.08%, with 2 [mu]g/ml fentanyl. The primary outcome was the incidence of operative delivery. We also examined other obstetric, neonatal, and analgesic outcomes.

Results: There was no difference in the incidence of operative delivery between the two groups (148 of 276 bupivacaine recipients vs. 135 of 279 ropivacaine recipients;P = 0.25) or any obstetric or neonatal outcome. The incidence of motor block was significantly increased in the bupivacaine group compared with the ropivacaine group at 6 h (47 of 93 vs. 29 of 93, respectively;P = 0.006) and 10 h (29 of 47 vs. 16 of 41, respectively;P = 0.03) after injection. Satisfaction with mobility was higher with ropivacaine than with bupivacaine (mean +/- SD: 76 +/- 23 vs. 72 +/- 23, respectively;P = 0.013). Satisfaction for analgesia at delivery was higher for bupivacaine than for ropivacaine (mean +/- SD: 71 +/- 25 vs. 66 +/- 26, respectively;P = 0.037).     

Ropivacaine 0.15% plus sufentanil 0.5 microg/mL and ropivacaine 0.10% plus sufentanil 0.5 microg/mL are equivalent for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor

We compared the administration of 0.15% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil with that of 0.10% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil for labor analgesia with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) to determine whether a decreased concentration of ropivacaine could produce equally effective analgesia. One-hundred-thirty healthy pregnant women at term were randomized in a double-blinded fashion. The PCEA settings were as follows: 12-mL initial bolus, 5-mL bolus dose, 5-min lockout interval, and 10 mL/h basal infusion. Patient demographics and labor characteristics were comparable in both groups. No differences were observed for pain scores, maternal satisfaction, volume of anesthetic solution administered, number of boluses requested and delivered, need for supplemental boluses, mode of delivery, motor block, side effects, or Apgar scores. Patients in the 0.10% ropivacaine group used significantly less drug than those in the 0.15% group (mean, 57 mg; 95% confidence interval, 50.5-63.5 mg; versus mean, 88.0 mg; 95% confidence interval, 74.4-93.3 mg, respectively; P < 0.0001). Ropivacaine 0.10% plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil administered via PCEA for labor analgesia is equally effective as ropivacaine 0.15% plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil, with a 30% local anesthetic-sparing effect and a 40% reduction in cost. However, this reduction in local anesthetic is not associated with a decrease in the incidence of motor block, side effects, or instrumental deliveries. IMPLICATIONS: Ropivacaine 0.10% plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil given via patient-controlled epidural anesthesia for labor analgesia is equally as effective as ropivacaine 0.15% plus 0.5 microg/mL of sufentanil, with a 30% local anesthetic-sparing effect and a 40% reduction in cost. This reduction in ropivacaine concentration is not associated with a decrease in the incidence of motor block, side effects, or instrumental deliveries.     

Background infusion is not beneficial during labor patient-controlled analgesia with 0.1% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil

BACKGROUND: Although patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labor has been extensively studied in recent clinical trials, the role of a background infusion associated with self-administered boluses is still debated. The authors designed a study to assess whether the use of PCEA with or without background infusion could improve the comfort of parturients and their satisfaction during labor and delivery without affecting the total consumption of local anesthetics. METHODS: One hundred thirty-three laboring parturients requesting epidural analgesia administered via PCEA with a solution of 0.1% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil were randomly assigned to four groups, according to the rate of background infusion used (0, 3, 6, and 9 ml/h). Local anesthetic requirements, maternal satisfaction, verbal pain scores, incidence of side effects, and outcome of labor were compared among groups. RESULTS: Patient demographics, labor characteristics, side effects, and Apgar scores were similar in each group. No significant differences were observed between groups in verbal pain scores during labor, number of supplemental boluses, or maternal satisfaction. A significantly greater overall total drug consumption with a 6-ml/h or a 9-ml/h background infusion (74 and 78 ml, respectively) was observed in comparison with PCEA without a background infusion (55 ml). A similar relation was observed for hourly use during both the first and the second stage of labor. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the use of a background infusion with PCEA during labor leads to a greater consumption of anesthetic solution without improving comfort and satisfaction of parturients. Moreover, not using a background infusion does not provide an increased incidence of supplemental boluses (which might cause problems in a busy unit) and allows for a substantial reduction in the cost of analgesia.     

Epidural infusions for labor analgesia: A comparison of 0.2% ropivacaine, 0.1% ropivacaine,and 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl

Background and Objectives: Epidural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine is recommended by the manufacturer for labor analgesia, but lower concentrations may be effective. The objective of this study was to compare 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.2% ropivacaine and to examine the effect of addition of fentanyl. Methods: In a randomized double-blind study, 58 nulliparous laboring parturients had epidural analgesia established with 0.2% ropivacaine and were then randomized to receive one of the following epidural infusions at 10 mL/h: 0.2% ropivacaine (group R2, n = 19), 0.1% ropivacaine (group R1, n = 19), or 0.1% ropivacaine with 2 [mu ]g/mL fentanyl (group RF, n = 20). Supplementary analgesia was provided on request with 5-mL boluses of 0.2% ropivacaine. Results: All solutions provided effective analgesia during early labor, with all groups requiring similar numbers of supplementary top-ups. Visual analog pain scores in groups R2 and RF were equivalent and lower than in group R1 (P = .006). Hypotension was more frequent in group RF compared with groups R2 and R1 (P = .014). Patient and midwife satisfaction and obstetric and neonatal outcomes were similar among groups. Maternal venous plasma concentrations of ropivacaine were greater in group R2 compared with groups R1 and RF (P = .008), but umbilical venous concentrations were similar. Conclusions: We conclude that epidural infusion of 0.1% ropivacaine alone at 10 mL/h provided adequate analgesia in the first stage of labor, and that the addition of 2 [mu ]g/mL fentanyl to that concentration improved analgesia to a quality similar to 0.2% ropivacaine alone. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2002;27:31-36.     

Combined Spinal-Epidural versus Epidural Labor Analgesia

Background: Despite the growing popularity of combined spinal-epidural analgesia in laboring women, the exact role of intrathecal opioids and the needle-through-needle technique remains to be determined. The authors hypothesized that anesthetic technique would have little effect on obstetric outcome or anesthetic complications.

Methods: Data were prospectively collected from 2,183 laboring women randomly assigned to have labor analgesia induced with either 10 [mu]g intrathecal sufentanil with or without 2.0 mg bupivacaine (n = 1,071) or 10 [mu]g epidural sufentanil and 12.5-25.0 mg bupivacaine (n = 1,112). Immediately after induction, a continuous epidural infusion of 0.083% bupivacaine plus 0.3 [mu]g/ml sufentanil was begun in all patients and continued until delivery. Labor was managed by nurses, obstetricians, and obstetric residents who were unaware of the anesthetic technique used.

Results: Anesthetic technique lacked impact on our primary outcome: mode of delivery or labor duration. Infants whose mothers were allocated to the combined spinal-epidural group had a slightly higher umbilical artery carbon dioxide partial pressure (54.2 +/- 10.4 vs. 53.2 +/- 10.2 mmHg). However, only achieving at least 5 cm cervical dilation before induction of analgesia and having a cesarean delivery were independent risk factors for elevated umbilical artery carbon dioxide partial pressure. The frequencies of accidental dural puncture, failed epidural analgesia, headache, and epidural blood patch were low and similar in the two groups.     

Epidural analgesia with 0.15% ropivacaine plus sufentanil 0.5 microgram ml-1 versus 0.10% bupivacaine plus sufentanil 0.5 microgram ml-1: a double-blind comparison during labour

Background. Ropivacaine has been claimed to produce less motorblock than bupivacaine during epidural analgesia. However, thisadvantage has not been clearly confirmed in obstetric studiesusing low analgesic concentrations in a ratio close to thatsuggested to be equianalgesic. Methods. This double-blind, randomized, prospective study wasperformed in 140 parturients who requested epidural analgesia.After a lumbar epidural catheter had been placed, patients receivedeither 0.10% bupivacaine plus sufentanil 0.5 µg ml^–1or 0.15% ropivacaine plus sufentanil 0.5 µg ml^–1followed by a continuous infusion. Additional boluses were usedfor inadequate levels of analgesia. Visual analogue pain scores,motor block, level of sensory block, supplementary boluses andmain characteristics of labour were recorded. Results. No differences were observed between the two groupsfor pain scores, total volume of anaesthetic solution used [59(23) and 57 (24) ml in the bupivacaine and ropivacaine groupsrespectively], duration of labour, mode of delivery, side-effectsor satisfaction score. The incidence of motor block was notstatistically different between the groups (54 and 69% in thebupivacaine and ropivacaine groups respectively, P=0.07). However,when motor block occurred, survival analysis showed that itoccurred sooner in the course of labour with ropivacaine comparedwith bupivacaine (log rank test, P=0.012). Conclusion. Combined with sufentanil 0.5 µg ml^–1,0.10% bupivacaine and 0.15% ropivacaine produce effective andequivalent analgesia during labour, with similar incidencesof motor block. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 809–13     

Comparison of patient-controlled epidural bolus administration of 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.1% levobupivacaine, both with 0.0002% fentanyl, for analgesia during labour

The aim of the study was to compare the relative potencies and clinical characteristics of epidural ropivacaine and levobupivacaine in labour using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). In a randomised double-blinded study, 60 ASA I or II primigravidae requesting epidural analgesia in early labour were allocated to receive either 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl 0.0002% or 0.1% levobupivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia pump. Analgesia was established with 15 ml of study solution and maintained using 5-ml boluses of study solution with a 5-min lockout interval. There were no significant differences in onset time, duration and quality of analgesia, motor and sensory blockade, local anaesthetic consumption, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome or maternal satisfaction between the groups. We conclude that 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl and 0.1% levobupivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl are clinically indistinguishable for labour analgesia and appear pharmacologically equipotent when using PCEA.     

The Dose-Response of Intrathecal Sufentanil Added to Bupivacaine for Labor Analgesia

Background: Regional analgesia for labor often is initiated with an intrathecal injection of a local anesthetic and opioid. The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to determine the optimal dose of intrathecal sufentanil when combined with 2.5 mg bupivacaine for labor analgesia.

Methods: One hundred seventy parous parturients with cervical dilation between 3-5 cm were randomized to receive intrathecal 0 (control), 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, or 10.0 [mu]g sufentanil combined with 2.5 mg bupivacaine, followed by a lidocaine epidural test dose, for initiation of analgesia (34 patients in each group). Visual analog scores and the presence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus were determined every 15 min until the patient requested additional analgesia. Fetal heart rate tracings were compared between groups.

Results: Groups were similar for age, height, weight, oxytocin dose, duration of labor, and baseline visual analog scores. Duration of action was significantly shorter for control patients (39 +/- 25 min [mean +/- SD]) compared with those administered sufentanil, all doses (93 +/- 32, 93 +/- 47, 94 +/- 33, 97 +/- 39 min), but was not different among groups administered 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, or 10.0 [mu]g sufentanil. More patients who received 10 [mu]g sufentanil reported nausea and vomiting than did control patients. The severity of pruritus increased with administration of 7.5 and 10.0 [mu]g sufentanil. There was no difference in fetal heart rate changes among groups.     

A multicenter,randomized, controlled trial comparing bupivacaine with ropivacaine for labor analgesia

BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis of studies comparing high doses of bupivacaine with ropivacaine for labor pain found a higher incidence of forceps deliveries, motor block, and poorer neonatal outcome with bupivacaine. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in these outcomes when a low concentration of patient-controlled epidural bupivacaine combined with fentanyl is compared with ropivacaine combined with fentanyl. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, including term, nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor. For the initiation of analgesia, patients were randomized to receive either 15 ml bupivacaine, 0.1%, or 15 ml ropivacaine, 0.1%, each with 5 microg/ml fentanyl. Analgesia was maintained with patient-controlled analgesia with either local anesthetic, 0.08%, with 2 microg/ml fentanyl. The primary outcome was the incidence of operative delivery. We also examined other obstetric, neonatal, and analgesic outcomes. RESULTS: There was no difference in the incidence of operative delivery between the two groups (148 of 276 bupivacaine recipients vs. 135 of 279 ropivacaine recipients; P = 0.25) or any obstetric or neonatal outcome. The incidence of motor block was significantly increased in the bupivacaine group compared with the ropivacaine group at 6 h (47 of 93 vs. 29 of 93, respectively; P = 0.006) and 10 h (29 of 47 vs. 16 of 41, respectively; P = 0.03) after injection. Satisfaction with mobility was higher with ropivacaine than with bupivacaine (mean +/- SD: 76 +/- 23 vs. 72 +/- 23, respectively; P = 0.013). Satisfaction for analgesia at delivery was higher for bupivacaine than for ropivacaine (mean +/- SD: 71 +/- 25 vs. 66 +/- 26, respectively; P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the incidence of operative delivery or neonatal outcome among nulliparous patients who received low concentrations of bupivacaine or ropivacaine for labor analgesia.     

Epidural analgesia during labor: intermittent bolus or patient controlled administration?

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare efficacy and side effects produced by two techniques of epidural analgesia during labor: intermittent bolus and patient-controlled epidural analgesia. METHODS: Eighty parturients were enrolled in this study: forty received intermittent bolus analgesia (first bolus: 20 mg of ropivacaine 0.1% + 10 gamma of sufentanil, next bolus: 10 mg of ropivacaine 0.1% during the first 4 hours, and then 10 mg of ropivacaine 0.1% + 2.5 gamma of sufentanil each time they complained of pain), and forty parturients received PCEA (starting with a bolus of 20 mg ropivacaine 0.1% + 10 gamma sufentanil, followed by administration with a pump programmed to deliver a continuous background infusion of ropivacaine 0,1% + 0.25 gamma/ml of sufentanil at 5 ml/h and 5 ml patient-triggered boluses with a 15 min lock-out interval; insufficient analgesia was treated by extra boluses of the same ropivacaine solution). In each group the efficacy of the analgesia (verbal numerical pain scores, amount of local anesthetics consumption), labor duration, side effects and patient satisfaction have been studied. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two different epidural techniques. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen of PCEA proves a viable and safe alternative for epidural analgesia during labor.     

Epidural levobupivacaine 0.1% or ropivacaine 0.1% combined with morphine provides comparable analgesia after abdominal surgery

Ropivacaine appears attractive for epidural analgesia because it produces less motor block than racemic bupivacaine. The potential benefits of levobupivacaine with regard to motor blockade require further investigations. In this study, we compared the efficacy, dose requirements, side effects, and motor block observed with epidural levobupivacaine and ropivacaine when given in combination with small-dose morphine for 60 h after major abdominal surgery. Postoperatively, 50 patients were randomly allocated, in a double-blinded manner, to patient-controlled epidural analgesia with the same settings and without basal infusion, using 0.1% levobupivacaine or 0.1% ropivacaine. Both were combined with an epidural infusion of 0.1 mg/h morphine. Pain scores, side effects, motor block, and local anesthetic consumption were measured for 60 h. Pain scores measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale were approximately 20 mm at rest and 40 mm during mobilization in both groups. Bromage scores were 1 for all patients after the fourth postoperative hour. Consumption of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine were similar: 344 +/- 178 mg levobupivacaine versus 347 +/- 199 mg ropivacaine 48 h postoperatively. On postoperative day 2, 19 patients in the ropivacaine group versus 12 in the levobupivacaine group were able to ambulate (P < 0.05). No difference was noted concerning incidence of side effects. We conclude that when used as patient-controlled epidural analgesia and combined with small-dose epidural morphine, 0.1% levobupivacaine and 0.1% ropivacaine produce comparable postoperative analgesia with a similar incidence of side effects. IMPLICATIONS: Small concentrations (0.1%) of epidural levobupivacaine and ropivacaine combined with morphine (0.1 mg/h) produce comparable analgesia and have similar side effects for similar dose requirements.     

Dose-dependent Reduction of the Minimum Local Analgesic Concentration of Bupivacaine by Sufentanil for Epidural Analgesia in Labor

Background: The minimum local analgesic concentration (MLAC) has been defined as the median effective local analgesic concentration in a 20-ml volume for epidural analgesia in the first stage of labor. The aim of this study was to determine the local anesthetic-sparing efficacy of epidural sufentanil by its effect on the MLAC of bupivacaine.

Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, prospective study, 147 parturients at Results: The MLAC of bupivacaine alone was 0.104% wt/vol (95% CI, 0.090 - 0.117). The addition of sufentanil at doses of 0.5 [micro sign]g/ml, 1 [micro sign]g/ml, and 1.5 [micro sign]g/ml resulted in significant reductions (P < 0.0001) in the MLAC of bupivacaine to 0.048% wt/vol (95% CI, 0.030 - 0.065), 0.021% wt/vol (95% CI, 0 - 0.055), and 0.009% wt/vol (95% CI, 0 - 0.023), respectively.     

Walking with Labor Epidural Analgesia: The Impact of Bupivacaine Concentration and a Lidocaine-Epinephrine Test Dose

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 [mu]g sufentanil. Bupivacaine, 0.0625%, with 0.33 [mu]g/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.     

Ropivacaine 0.075% and bupivacaine 0.075% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL are equivalent for labor epidural analgesia.

Fifty percent effective dose estimates for ropivacaine and bupivacaine suggest that ropivacaine is 40% less potent than bupivacaine to initiate labor analgesia. At clinically used concentrations, however, the drugs seem indistinguishable for initiating and maintaining labor analgesia. We designed this study to evaluate a concentration near the reported 50% effective dose values for ropivacaine and bupivacaine in an attempt to detect differences between the drugs during routine clinical use. Fifty-nine nulliparous women in labor were randomized to receive 0.075% ropivacaine or bupivacaine, each with fentanyl 2 microg/mL. After epidural placement and the administration of a lidocaine/epinephrine test dose, 20 mL of study solution was administered and a patient-controlled epidural infusion was initiated with the following settings: 6 mL/h basal rate, 5 mL bolus, 10 min lockout, and 30 mL/h limit. Breakthrough pain was treated with 10-mL boluses of study solution. By using a study design to detect a 40% difference in hourly drug use between groups, we found no statistically significant differences in the amount of local anesthetic used, verbal pain scores, sensory levels, motor blockade, labor duration, mode of delivery, side effects, or patient satisfaction. We conclude that 0.075% ropivacaine and bupivacaine, with fentanyl, are equally effective for labor analgesia using the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique. IMPLICATIONS: At small concentrations, ropivacaine and bupivacaine when combined with fentanyl are equally effective for labor analgesia. Patients self-administered similar volumes of 0.075% ropivacaine or bupivacaine solutions containing fentanyl (2 microg/mL) suggesting that at this concentration, and with the addition of fentanyl, ropivacaine and bupivacaine can be used interchangeably.     

A double-blind comparison of 0.125% ropivacaine with sufentanil and 0.125% bupivacaine with sufentanil for epidural labor analgesia

BACKGROUND: This study intends to evaluate the benefits of the administration of intermittent bolus doses of ropivacaine (0.125%) compared with bupivacaine (0.125%) after addition of sufentanil for analgesia during labor. METHODS: One hundred thirty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2 parturients were studied. The 90 initial patients were assigned randomly to receive 10 ml bupivacaine, 0.125%, plus 7.5 microg sufentanil (initial bupivacaine 0.125% group) or ropivacaine, 0.125%, plus 7.5 microg sufentanil (ropivacaine 0.125% group). Forty additional patients were recruited and received 0.125% bupivacaine plus 7.5 microg sufentanil (additional bupivacaine 0.125% group) or 0.100% bupivacaine plus 7.5 microg sufentanil (additional bupivacaine 0.100% group). The duration of analgesia, visual analogue scores for pain, motor blockade (using a six-point modified Bromage scale), patient satisfaction scores, nausea, pruritus, heart rate, and blood pressure were recorded. RESULTS: Bupivacaine 0.125% and ropivacaine 0.125% coadministered with sufentanil provided rapid and complete analgesia. Onset of analgesia occurred after +/-15 min and lasted +/-90 min. After the third epidural injection, patients in the ropivacaine group experienced significantly less severe motor blockade than patients in the initial bupivacaine 0.125% group. At this point, 93% of the patients in the ropivacaine group were free from motor impairment versus 66% in the bupivacaine group (P<0.05). Comparable levels of motor blockade were obtained in both additional groups. Patients' evaluation of their analgesia was worst in the bupivacaine 0.100% group. CONCLUSIONS: Ropivacaine 0.125% with sufentanil affords reliable analgesia with minimal motor blockade.     

Epidural Neostigmine Combined with Sufentanil Provides Balanced and Selective Analgesia in Early Labor

Background: This study evaluated the efficacy of an epidural single dose of neostigmine combined with sufentanil to provide selective and balanced analgesia at the beginning of labor.

Methods: After informed consent, 125 healthy parturients were randomly allocated to receive, after a test dose, a single injection of either epidural sufentanil 20 [mu]g (minimal analgesic dose) or 10 [mu]g or a combination of sufentanil 10 [mu]g with neostigmine 250, 500, or 750 [mu]g in a total volume of 12 ml. Pain scores were recorded at regular intervals to determine onset and duration of analgesia. Maternal and fetal vital parameters as well as side effects were closely monitored.

Results: Parturients did not differ concerning demographic data. Epidural neostigmine 500 [mu]g with sufentanil 10 [mu]g produced effective analgesia (visual analog scale <30 mm within 10 min in 72% parturients and within 15 min in 85% parturients; average duration of 119 min, confidence interval 96-142 min) that was as effective as epidural sufentanil 20 [mu]g. Epidural combination with neostigmine 250 [mu]g was ineffective, whereas 750 [mu]g did not produce higher effect than 500 [mu]g. No motor block was recorded. Maternal and fetal vital parameters remained stable during labor.     

A multicentre trial comparing different concentrations of ropivacaine plus sufentanil with bupivacaine plus sufentanil for patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal concentration of ropivacaine for bolus-only patient-controlled epidural labour analgesia, three different doses of ropivacaine were evaluated in comparison with bupivacaine in a double-blinded multicentre study. METHODS: Four hundred-and-fifty labouring parturients at term in three different academic institutions were randomized to four groups receiving bupivacaine 0.125% with sufentanil 0.75 microg mL(-1), ropivacaine 0.125% or 0.175% with sufentanil 0.75 microg mL(-1), or ropivacaine 0.2%. After an initial bolus of 10 mL of the study solution, and once visual analogue scores (VAS) were below 30 mm, patient-controlled epidural analgesia was initiated with a bolus of 4 mL, a lockout interval of 15 min and without a background infusion. Variables studied were the quality of analgesia, incidence of side-effects, the degree of motor blockade, and the mode of delivery. RESULTS: Bupivacaine 0.125% and ropivacaine 0.125% with sufentanil proved equally effective in providing labour analgesia without a difference in local anaesthetic consumption (48.6 +/- 23 mg bupivacaine vs. 52.1 +/- 38 mg ropivacaine), motor blockade or mode of delivery. Ropivacaine 0.175% plus sufentanil enhanced the quality of analgesia of the initial loading dose, whereas ropivacaine 0.2% without sufentanil increased the consumption of local anaesthetics (80.2 +/- 34 mg; P < 0.05) and the degree of motor blockade. CONCLUSION: Despite recent studies indicating that bupivacaine and ropivacaine may not be equipotent, both local anaesthetics provided equi-effective analgesia at equal doses without a difference in side-effects.