Risk factors for failure to extend labor epidural analgesia to epidural anesthesia for Cesarean section

OBJECTIVE: To identify parturients at risk of inability to extend labor epidural analgesia in whom alternative methods of anesthesia should be considered for Cesarean section (CS). METHODS: For 6 months, we prospectively studied women undergoing a CS with a functioning epidural catheter in place from the delivery ward. All parturients received the same epidural protocol: bolus of bupivacaine 0.1% and fentanyl, then bupivacaine 0.1% and fentanyl (2 microg/ml) 10-15 ml/h and an additional 5 ml of bupivacaine 0.125% top-ups according to patient request. Sixteen millilitres of lidocaine 2%, 1 ml of bicarbonate, and 100 microg of fentanyl were given for CS. Failed epidural analgesia was defined as the need to convert to general anesthesia. RESULTS: Of the 101 parturients studied, 20 (19.8%) required conversion to general anesthesia. In univariate analysis, the likelihood of failed epidural anesthesia was inversely correlated with parturient's age (P = 0.014) and directly correlated with pre-pregnancy weight (P = 0.019), weight at the end of pregnancy (P = 0.003), body mass index (BMI) at the end of pregnancy (P = 0.0004), gestational week (P = 0.008), number of top-ups (P = 0.0004) and visual analog scale (VAS) 2 h before CS (P = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, the number of top-ups in the delivery ward was the best predictor of epidural anesthesia failure (odds ratio 4.39, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Younger, more obese parturients at a higher gestational week, requiring more top-ups during labor, having a higher VAS in the 2 h before CS are at risk of inability to extend labor epidural analgesia to epidural anesthesia for CS.     

布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛安全性探讨

目的探讨布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛的效果、并发症及安全陛。方法1600例行连续术后硬膜外镇痛的患者,按所用镇痛药物配伍不同分为：0．1％布比卡因＋5μg／ml芬太尼组（B组,n=920）和0．2％罗哌卡因＋2μg／ml芬太尼组（R组,n=680）。对两组镇痛效果（视觉模拟评分及患者对镇痛效果的满意度）、并发症和处理措施进行总结分析。结果视觉模拟评分两组无差异（P〉0．05）。患者对镇痛的满意度R组明显高于B组（P〉0．05）。并发症的发生率B组高于R组（P〉0．05）。两组内年龄≥60岁的患者低血压的发生率高于年龄〈60岁者（P〈0．05）;女性患者恶心呕吐的发生率高于男性（P〈0．05）;腰段硬膜外镇痛患者下肢乏力或麻木的发生率明显高于胸段硬膜外镇痛患者（P〈0．05）。结论布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍均可安全有效地用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛,罗哌卡因组并发症较少,并发症的发生与镇痛药物、年龄、性别及硬膜外置管部位有关。     

Determination of the analgesic dose–response relationship for epidural fentanyl and sufentanil with bupivacaine 0.125% in laboring patients

Study Objective: To establish the analgesic effective doses as defined as a visual analog pain scale (VAS) of at least 10 for 95% of parturients (ED₉₅) receiving either epidural fentanyl or sufentanil with bupivacaine 0.125% for labor analgesia.

Design: Double-blind, randomized controlled study.

Setting: Two tertiary-care teaching hospitals.

Patients: 100 female patients, at full-term pregnancy, in active early labor (<5 cm cervical dilation) and requesting obstetric anesthesia services for labor analgesia.

Interventions: Patients were randomized and equally distributed to receive one of ten epidural dosing regimens of bupivacaine 0.125% alone or with either fentanyl 25, 50, 75, or 100 μg or sufentanil 5, 10, 15, 20, or 25 μg in a 10-ml bolus after a 3-ml test dose of bupivacaine 0.25%.

Measurements and Main Results: VAS scores were obtained from each parturient using a 10-cm plastic VAS slide rule at times 0, 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 minutes, and then again when the patient requested additional analgesia. Analgesic duration and demographic and obstetric data also were obtained. Using a log-probit dose–response analysis, analgesic success as defined as a VAS of at least 10 with each opioid dose was plotted and an ED₉₅ value of 8 μg and 50 μg was established for sufentanil and fentanyl, respectively, in bupivacaine 0.125%. No statistical difference was detected for analgesic duration or incidence of side effects between analgesic groups.

Conclusions: Epidural analgesia with fentanyl and sufentanil in bupivacaine 0.125% behaves in a dose–response fashion allowing for the determination of equipotent dose of each.     

罗哌卡因复合芬太尼用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛的可行性

目的 探讨0．075％罗哌卡因或布比卡因与芬太尼2μg/ml的混合液用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛的可行性。方法 60例初产妇随机分为三组：A组（n＝20）0．075％罗哌卡因＋芬太尼2μg/ml;B组（n＝20）0．075％布比卡因＋芬太尼2μg/ml;C级（n＝20）为对照组。采用双盲法进行视觉模拟疼痛评分（VAS）和行走功能的评定。记录各组产妇的生命体征、胎心率（FHR）、产程时间、分娩方式、催产素用量以及新生儿Apgar评分和脐静脉血气分析,并测定用药前和宫口开全时母体血清皮质醇浓度。结果 A、B两组产妇均获得良好镇痛效果,镇痛后A组所有产妇均能下床行走和自主排尿,而B组仅70％产妇能下床行走和自主排尿,两组比较有显著性差异（P＜0．05）;A、B两组第一产程末血清皮质醇浓度明显低于C组（P＜0．05）。产程时间、分娩方式和新生儿Apgar评分各组间均无差异（P＞0．05）。结论 0．075％罗哌卡因和芬太尼2μg/ml的混合液有效安全地用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛。     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labor: the addition of clonidine to bupivacaine-fentanyl

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Epidural clonidine has not been evaluated as a component of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) solutions during labor. A randomized, double-blind trial was conducted to investigate the efficacy and side effects of PCEA using bupivacaine and fentanyl, with or without clonidine. METHODS: Seventy-five healthy parturients in active labor were assigned to a PCEA solution of 0.0625% bupivacaine and fentanyl 2 microg/mL (4 mL demand bolus, 15 min lockout), with or without clonidine 4.5 microg/mL. The primary outcome measure was parturient rating of analgesia; others assessments included pain scores, drug utilization, supplementation and side effects. RESULTS: Thirty-one parturients received clonidine (group BFC) and 38 received control solution (group BF). Eight (6 group BF, 2 group BFC, P = .28) failed to achieve satisfactory epidural analgesia. There was a trend for parturient ratings of pain relief to be higher in group BFC, with significantly more reporting excellent first-stage analgesia (81% v. 57%, P<.05). Pain scores were similar. Clonidine (median dose, 28 microg/h) reduced total bupivacaine and fentanyl use (P<.01), and reduced supplementation (P<.01). Maternal blood pressure (BP) and recordings of systolic BP below 100 mm Hg did not differ. Group BFC had higher sedation scores (P<.01), but no one appeared oversedated. Shivering was reduced in group BFC (P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of clonidine to epidural bupivacaine and fentanyl for PCEA in labor improved analgesia, reduced the supplementation rate, and reduced shivering. Increased sedation and lower BP were not clinically important.     

Effect of intravenous versus epidural fentanyl on the minimum local analgesic concentration of epidural bupivacaine in labor

BACKGROUND: The minimum local analgesic concentration (MLAC) has been defined as the median effective local analgesic concentration (EC50) in a 20-ml volume for epidural analgesia in the first stage of labor. The aim of this study was to determine the relative local anesthetic sparing efficacies of intravenous and epidural fentanyl by comparison of their effects on the MLAC of bupivacaine. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, prospective study, 84 parturients at < or = 7-cm cervical dilation who requested epidural analgesia were allocated to one of two groups. After lumbar epidural catheter placement, 20 ml bupivacaine (n = 44) or bupivacaine with 3 microg/ml (60 microg) fentanyl (n = 40) was administered. The plain bupivacaine group then received 60 microg intravenous fentanyl. The bupivacaine-fentanyl group received intravenous saline. The concentration of bupivacaine was determined by the response of the previous patient in that group to a higher or lower concentration using up-down sequential allocation. Analgesic efficacy was assessed using 100-mm visual analog pain scores, with < or = 10 mm within 30 min define as effective. RESULTS: The MLAC of bupivacaine-intravenous fentanyl was 0.064% wt/vol (95% confidence interval, 0.049-0.080), and the MLAC of bupivacaine-epidural fentanyl was 0.034% wt/vol (95% confidence interval, 0.017-0.050). Epidural fentanyl significantly increased the analgesic potency of bupivacaine by a factor of 1.88 (95% confidence interval, 1.09-3.67) compared with intravenous fentanyl. The epidural fentanyl group demonstrated significantly higher dermatomal spread (P = 0.0064) and increased pruritus (P = 0. 01). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural fentanyl significantly reduced the MLAC of bupivacaine when compared with intravenous fentanyl for the parturients in this study. The significantly enhanced local anesthetic sparing, dermatomal level, and pruritus with epidural fentanyl suggest a primarily spinal site of action.     

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.     

Regional analgesia in early active labour: combined spinal epidural vs. epidural

We randomly allocated 93 women in early active labour and requesting epidural analgesia to receive either epidural ( n  = 48) or combined spinal–epidural analgesia ( n  = 45). For epidural analgesia 15 ml of bupivacaine 0.1% with 75 μg of fentanyl were injected into the epidural space. For combined spinal–epidural analgesia 1 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% with 25 μg of fentanyl were injected into the subarachnoid space. For both groups subsequent top-ups of 10 ml of bupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 20 μg were given using a lightweight patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) pump with a lockout time of 30 min. We assessed analgesia and the degree of motor blockade and found no significant differences in pain or maternal satisfaction scores between the two groups. The time to first top-up was significantly longer in the epidural group than in the CSE group (p = 0.01). The combined spinal–epidural group had significantly greater motor blockade at 30 min than the epidural group (p = 0.01), but there was no difference after this. The PCEA machine failed completely twice and temporarily many times. We conclude that the combined spinal–epidural technique confers no advantages in early active labour. Also, a lightweight PCEA pump needs to be more reliable before we can recommend its use.     

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.     

腰麻联合双管硬膜外分娩镇痛的临床效果

目的评估腰麻联合双管硬膜外分娩镇痛的效果及对母婴的影响。方法 2015年4月至2016年1月于本院要求分娩镇痛的初产妇129例,随机分为两组。D组(n=68)腰麻后双管硬膜外阻滞分娩镇痛,S组(n=61)腰麻后单管硬膜外阻滞分娩镇痛。记录镇痛前(T0)及镇痛后10min(T1)、30 min(T2)、120 min(T3)、宫口开至7~8 cm(T4)、宫口开全(T5)、第二产程用力分娩时(T6)的VAS疼痛评分,各产程时间及缩宫素使用情况,镇痛泵按压及镇痛药物使用情况,分娩方式,产时出血量,新生儿情况和镇痛不良反应。结果 T0~T4时两组VAS评分差异无统计学意义,T5、T6时D组VAS评分明显低于S组(P0.05)。镇痛泵有效按压次数及镇痛药物使用量两组差异无统计学意义,但镇痛泵总按压次数D组明显少于S组(P0.05)。各产程时间、缩宫素使用率、分娩方式、产时出血量、新生儿情况和镇痛不良反应两组差异均无统计学意义。结论腰麻联合双管硬膜外分娩镇痛效果确切,不良反应少,产妇满意度高,对母婴是安全的。     

Comparison of combined spinal epidural anesthesia and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section

BACKGROUND: Epidural anesthesia (EA) is popular for cesarean section, but has some drawbacks such as incomplete block, inadequate muscle relaxation and delayed onset. Combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSEA) has gained increasing interest as it combines the reliability of a spinal block and the flexibility of an epidural block. We investigated the efficacy of CSEA that combines the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, comparing with pH-adjusted EA, for cesarean section. METHODS: Sixty-four pregnant women at full term were divided into two groups. Patients in the CSEA group (n=32) were given 1.5-1.6 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine intrathecally, followed by 10 ml of 0.25% plain bupivacaine through the epidural catheter 10 min later. Patients in the EA group (n=32) received 20-25 ml of 2% lidocaine which was already mixed with 0.1 ml of 0.1% epinephrine, 100 g of fentanyl and 1.5 ml of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. The quality and side effects of surgical anesthesia, neonatal state, and postoperative course were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: In the EA group, 22% (7 cases) complained of intraoperative pain but none in the CSEA group (P=0.011). Muscle relaxation and motor block were much better in the CSEA group (P<0.001 and P=0.011 each). Significantly more women in the EA group had shivering (P=0.001). They also had more nausea and vomiting but the differences were not significant. Not only the time to T4 block (9.7 vs. 18.3 min, mean, P<0.001) but also the stay in the postanesthesia care unit, recovery of sensory and motor block and start of postoperative pain were all significantly shorter in the CSEA group. No one in either group had postdural puncture headache (PDPH). CONCLUSION: We can conclude that, when combining the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, CSEA has greater efficacy and fewer side effects than the pH-adjusted EA in cesarean sections.     

Patient-controlled epidural technique improves analgesia for labor but increases cesarean delivery rate compared with the intermittent bolus technique

BACKGROUND: We tested the hypothesis that patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor (PCEA) provides better analgesia and satisfaction than the intermittent bolus technique (bolus) without affecting the mode of delivery. METHODS: We randomized 187 parturients to receive labor analgesia using either the PCEA or bolus technique. The PCEA group received a starting bolus of 14 mg of bupivacaine and 60 micro g of fentanyl in a 15-ml volume, followed by a background infusion (bupivacaine 0.08% and fentanyl 2 microg ml(-1)) 5 ml h(-1) with a 5-ml bolus and 15-min lock-out interval. The bolus group received boluses of 20 mg of bupivacaine and 75 micro g of fentanyl in a 15-ml volume. RESULTS: Parturients in the PCEA group had significantly (P < 0.05-0.01) less pain during the first and second stages of labor. There was no difference in the spontaneous delivery rate between the groups, but the cesarean delivery rate was significantly (P < 0.05) higher (16.3% vs. 6.7%) in the PCEA group than in the bolus group. Bupivacaine consumption was significantly (P < 0.01) higher (11.2 mg h(-1) vs. 9.6 mg h(-1)) and the second stage of labor was significantly (P < 0.01) longer (70 min vs. 54 min) in the PCEA group than in the bolus group. Patient satisfaction was equally good in both groups. CONCLUSION: The PCEA technique provided better pain relief. This was associated with higher bupivacaine consumption, prolongation of the second stage of labor, and an increased rate of cesarean section.     

Anesthetic quality during cesarean section following subarachnoid or epidural administration of bupivacaine with or without fentanyl

Background: It is often assumed that subarachnoid administration of local anesthetics produces a more profound blockade than epidural anesthesia. Furthermore, the addition of fentanyl has been reported to increase preferentially intraoperative analgesia. In the present study we set out to study these two issues in a randomized and controlled study with respect to perceived pain and discomfort during surgery and postoperative pain. Methods: In the present study, 100 parturients subjected to elective cesarean section, 34 nullipara and 66 multipara, received one out of four combinations of the local anesthetic bupivacaine and the opioid fentanyl; group A - bupivacaine 12.5 mg+10 μg fentanyl subarachnoidally, group B - bupivacaine 12.5 mg+saline subarachnoidally, group C - bupivacaine 100 mg+100 μg fentanyl epidurally, group D - bupivacaine 100 mg+saline epidurally; N=25 in each group. Pain intensity and discomfort during surgery was assessed with a visual analogue scale (VAS). Postoperative pain intensity and need for analgesics postoperatively, ketobemidone, was registered for 24 h following surgery. Results: Intraoperative pain intensity and discomfort did not differ significantly between parturients in any of the four groups. Postoperative pain was significantly more intense in parturients receiving local anesthetics subarachnoidally as compared to the epidural groups during the first 6-h period. This difference was also reflected in a significantly increased consumption of analgesics during this period. No significant differences between the groups were observed with regard to hemo-dynamics (blood pressure), respiration (oxygen saturation) or other effects such as nausea or itching. All neonates had normal Apgar and neonatal adaptive capacity scores (NACS). Conclusion: We conclude that subarachnoidal (12.5 mg) and epidural (100 mg) injections with bupivacaine both produced adequate anesthetic quality in women undergoing elective cesarean section. The addition of fentanyl (10 μg subarachnoidally or 100 μg epidurally) did not significantly improve the quality of these already profound blockades.     

Continuous epidural infusion of alfentanil and bupivacaine for labor and delivery

The purpose of this study was to compare alfentanil and fentanyl used in combination with bupivacaine in a continuous infusion epidural technique during labor and delivery. Thirty nine ASA I parturients had epidural analgesia induced with 0.25% bupivacaine and were then assigned in a randomized double-blind fashion to receive a continuous infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine containing either 5 micro/ml of alfentanil or 2 micro/ml of fentanyl at a rate of 10 ml/h. Analgesia assessed by visual analog scores was significantly better during both stage I and stage II of labor in the group receiving alfentanil. No significant maternal or neonatal side-effects were demonstrated.     

The clinical effectiveness of epidural bupivacaine, bupivacaine with lidocaine, and bupivacaine with fentanyl for labor analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of bupivacaine alone and in combination with lidocaine or fentanyl for epidural analgesia during labor. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blind study. SETTING: Labor and delivery unit at a university medical center. PATIENTS: Forty-five primiparas requesting epidural analgesia. INTERVENTIONS: Following epidural placement at L3-4 interspace, patients received either bupivacaine 0.5% (Group 1, n = 15), bupivacaine 0.25% with lidocaine 1% (Group 2, n = 15), or bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 50 micrograms in 10 ml of saline (Group 3, n = 15). Patients in Groups 1 and 2 received 6 to 10 ml of local anesthetic depending on patient height, while patients in Group 3 received 5 ml of local anesthetic plus 50 micrograms of fentanyl in 10 ml of saline. All solutions contained epinephrine 1:200,000. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were assessed at regular intervals following administration of the epidural solution. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were used to measure onset of analgesia, time to complete pain relief, duration of analgesia, and patient satisfaction with therapy. The frequency of shivering and pruritus and the extent of sensory/motor block also were evaluated. There were no intragroup differences in time to complete pain relief or patient satisfaction. However, patients in Group 3 noted the most rapid onset and longest duration of pain relief. Patients in Group 3 also experienced significantly less shivering and had the lowest degree of motor block. Two patients in Group 3 experienced mild pruritus. CONCLUSIONS: Epidurally administered fentanyl safely extended the duration of labor analgesia while reducing bupivacaine dose requirements and magnitude of motor block. In this setting, the combination of bupivacaine and lidocaine offered no clinical advantage over bupivacaine alone.     

程控硬膜外间歇脉冲注入与持续背景输注用于分娩镇痛的比较

目的比较程控硬膜外间歇脉冲注入(programmed intermittent epidural bolus,PIEB)和持续背景输注(CEI)两种模式联合PCEA用于分娩镇痛的临床效果。方法自愿接受分娩镇痛足月、单胎和头位初产妇200例,随机分为两组,每组100例。在宫口扩张2~3 cm时采用硬膜外阻滞行分娩镇痛。PIEB组背景输注剂量为8 ml/h,给药速度为6 ml/min,每小时给药一次;CEI组以8ml/h的速度持续给药。观察产妇镇痛前(T0)、镇痛后10 min(T1)、30 min(T2)、1 h(T3)、2 h(T4)、宫口开全时(T5)、分娩时(T6)、分娩后1 h(T7)BP、VAS评分、改良Bromage评分;PCEA追加次数、罗哌卡因、舒芬太尼的用量、宫缩情况、胎心率、产程时间、镇痛时间、分娩方式、产妇使用催产素、不良反应、新生儿Apgar评分、产妇满意度评分。结果 T4~T6时PIEB组VAS评分明显低于CEI组(P0.01)。PIEB组PCEA追加次数、药物用量明显少于CEI组(P0.05),PIEB组产妇满意度明显高于CEI组(P0.05)。两组产妇的血压、宫缩持续时间和间隔时间、胎心率、产程、镇痛时间、分娩方式、使用催产素比例、不良反应发生率及新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义。结论与采用CEI+PCEA模式比较,PIEB+PCEA模式的PCEA追加率更低、用药量更少、VAS评分更低、产妇的满意度更高,而不良反应并没有增加。     

Spinal anesthesia for cesarean section following inadequate labor epidural analgesia: a retrospective audit

BACKGROUND: High blocks have been reported when spinal anesthesia is used for cesarean section following inadequate labor epidural analgesia. We have therefore modified the practice at our institution to minimize this risk and conducted a retrospective observational study of outcome following the change of practice. METHOD: The records of 115 women with inadequate epidural labor analgesia who required cesarean section between July 1998 and January 2002 were studied. No epidural boluses were administered in the 30 min preceding spinal anesthesia and a reduced spinal dose, median (range) 9.38 mg (7.5-11.3 mg) of 0.75% hyperbaric bupivacaine and fentanyl 15 microg (10-25 microg) was used. Patients were left sitting for 2 min and then positioned supine with left uterine displacement and were closely monitored for symptoms or signs that would suggest a high block. RESULTS: No parturient developed a high spinal necessitating intubation, and there was no adverse neonatal outcome. CONCLUSION: These findings do not conclusively establish this method as safe, but should spinal anesthesia for cesarean section following suboptimal labor epidural analgesia be considered, avoiding epidural boluses immediately preceding spinal injection, using a lower spinal dose, and delayed supine positioning following spinal injection may be advisable.     

The influence of a bupivacaine and fentanyl epidural infusion after epidural fentanyl in patients allowed to ambulate in early labor

Epidural fentanyl after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose provides adequate analgesia and allows for ambulation during early labor. This study was designed to determine the influence of an epidural infusion of bupivacaine plus fentanyl administered after initiation of epidural labor analgesia with fentanyl. Specifically, we evaluated whether there is an increase in motor block or an increased time to request for further analgesic medication. Fifty-one laboring primigravid women at <5 cm cervical dilation who requested epidural analgesia were enrolled. After a 3-mL epidural test dose of 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine (5 microg/mL), patients received fentanyl 100 microg via the epidural catheter. They then randomly received either an infusion (10 mL/h) of 0.0625% bupivacaine with fentanyl (3 microg/mL) or an infusion of preservative-free saline. After the administration of the initial analgesic, pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient at 10, 20, and 30 min, every 30 min thereafter, and at the time of request for additional analgesic medication, by an observer blinded to the technique used. There were no demographic differences between the two groups. The mean duration of analgesia (time from initial dose to request for additional analgesia) was increased in the group that received a continuous infusion of bupivacaine and fentanyl compared with the Saline group (198 +/- 86 vs 145 +/- 50 min; P < 0.009). Side effects were similar between the two groups. No patient in either group experienced any detectable motor block. Fourteen patients chose to ambulate in the Saline group, and 12 patients chose to ambulate in the Infusion group. In early laboring patients, a continuous infusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine infusion with fentanyl (3 microg/mL) prolonged the duration until top-up was required, after epidural fentanyl 100 microg after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, and did not cause any clinically detectable motor block. IMPLICATIONS: A 0.0625% bupivacaine and fentanyl (3 microg/mL) infusion, when added to epidural fentanyl (100 microg), prolongs the analgesic duration without increasing motor block in women in early labor.     

The effect of intrathecal epinephrine on epidural infused analgesics during labor

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In order to prolong labor analgesia, one may add intrathecal epinephrine to the combination of bupivacaine and fentanyl. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that the addition of intrathecal epinephrine would lessen the requirement for a rescue dose of epidural analgesia during labor. METHODS: One hundred-eight parturients randomly received intrathecal bupivacaine 2.5 mg and fentanyl 25 microgram with epinephrine 100 microgram (Group BFE) or without (Group BF). Analgesia was assessed by visual analogue pain score (VAPS) 15 and 30 minutes after drug administration. Then, epidural analgesia (0.1% bupivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl and 1:250,000 epinephrine at 10 mL/h) was initiated. If the patient requested additional analgesia and VAPS was over 30 mm, we added 8 mL epidural bupivacaine 0.125%. The requirement for additional analgesia, the incidence of motor block assessed by a modified Bromage score, hypotension, nausea, and pruritus was noted. RESULTS: Except for 3 parturients in Group BF, satisfactory analgesia was achieved in all parturients 30 minutes after intrathecal drug administration. Following 30 minutes of intrathecal drug administration, VAPSs (mean +/- SD) were 0 +/- 4 mm in Group BFE and 4 +/- 11 mm in Group BF. The number of patients who required additional labor analgesia in Group BFE (11 patients, 20%) was significantly less than in Group BF (26 patients, 48%) (P =.003). The incidence of motor block 30 minutes after spinal analgesia in Group BFE (12 patients, 22%) was significantly higher than in Group BF (3 patients, 6%) (P =.024). Nausea and pruritus were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: The addition of epinephrine to intrathecal bupivacaine-fentanyl lessened the requirement for additional epidural analgesia without increasing hypotension, nausea, or pruritus. However, the incidence of motor block may be increased without labor prolongation.     

硬膜外不同输注模式用于分娩镇痛的比较

目的 比较规律间断硬膜外泵注（RIEB）和持续性硬膜外输注（CEI）复合病人自控硬膜外镇痛（PCEA）用于分娩镇痛的效果。方法 自愿接受分娩镇痛的初产妇225例,按照随机数字表法分为A、B、C三组,每组75例。所有产妇给予硬膜外分娩镇痛,选取L2~3间隙行硬膜外穿刺,镇痛液配方为0.08%罗哌卡因＋0.4 μg/mL舒芬太尼。A组产妇予以CEI模式镇痛,8 mL/h持续输注镇痛液。B组与C组产妇予以RIEB模式镇痛,自注射首剂开始,每间断1 h给予8 mL镇痛液,其中B组的注射速度为2 mL/min,C组的注射速度为6 mL/min。记录产妇满意度评分,镇痛前（T1）、镇痛后30 min（T2）、1h（T3）、宫口开大7~8 cm时（T4）、宫口开全时（T5）、分娩时（T6）的平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）、疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）和改良Bromage评分,观察病人自控硬膜外镇痛（PCEA）有效按压次数、罗哌卡因用量、舒芬太尼用量、产程、镇痛时间、分娩方式、新生儿Apgar评分、不良反应发生情况、产妇满意度评分。结果 三组产妇T1~T3时点VAS评分无统计学差异（P>0.05）;三组产妇T4~T6时点VAS评分,PCEA追加次数,罗哌卡因用量,舒芬太尼用量方面均显示C组B组>A组（P<0.05）;三组患者的平均动脉压,心率,改良Bromage评分,产程,镇痛时间,分娩方式,不良反应发生率,新生儿Apgar评分无统计学差异（P>0.05）。结论 RIEB复合PCEA用于分娩镇痛的效果显著,且泵注速度为6 mL/min的效果最佳,可有效减少PCEA追加次数,罗哌卡因用量和舒芬太尼用量,提高产妇满意度,而不良反应并没有增加。