Optimal dose of fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia after thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: We investigated the dose of fentanyl in ropivacaine for epidural anesthesia that will provide effective analgesia with minimal side effects after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled to undergo thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to four groups according to fentanyl dose in epidural analgesia: group R (0 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F1 (5 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F2 (10 microg x hr(-1); n = 15) and group F3 (15 microg x hr(-1); n = 15). Pain scores (visual analogue scale: VAS) were assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hrs after surgery. Degrees of satisfaction regarding pain relief and complications during a period of 48 hrs after surgery were compared. RESULTS: Pain scores in group F3 were significantly lower than those in the other groups at 3, 6, and 12 hrs after surgery. The number of postoperative analgesics used in group R was significantly more than the numbers used in other groups. The incidences of side effects were similar in the four groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that continuous epidural administration of more than 15 microg x hr(-1) of fentanyl in ropivacaine provides pain relief and few side effects after thoracic surgery.     

The optimal dose of fentanyl added to 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative epidural analgesia after gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND: Combined administration of local anesthetics and an opioid is frequently used in order to minimize the dose of each drug and to reduce adverse effects. Although fentanyl is commonly administered with local anesthetic, side effects of fentanyl increase in a dose-dependent manner. In this study, we determined the optimal dose of epidural fentanyl after gynecological surgery. METHODS: One hundred and sixteen adult patients scheduled for elective gynecological surgery were divided into 3 groups according to postoperative epidural analgesics; 0.2% ropivacaine (group R), 0.2% ropivacaine with 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 2), or 0.2% ropivacaine with 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 5). Each analgesic was infused at 5 ml x hr(-1) for 48 hr. Pain scores , incidence of NSAIDs administration and side effects were recorded for 48 hr after the surgery. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Ropivacaine alone could not provide sufficient analgesia. Although the addition of 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl to 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 5 ml x hr(-1) improved postoperative pain, side effects caused by fentanyl increased. Supplementing 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl provided sufficient analgesia with the least incidence of side effects.     

Comparison of three solutions of ropivacaine/fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine, 0.2%, is a new local anesthetic approved for epidural analgesia. The addition of 4 microg/ml fentanyl improves analgesia from epidural ropivacaine. Use of a lower concentration of ropivacaine-fentanyl may further improve analgesia or decrease side effects. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive one of three solutions: 0.2% ropivacaine-4 microg fentanyl 0.1% ropivacaine-2 microg fentanyl, or 0.05% ropivacaine-1 microg fentanyl for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after standardized combined epidural and general anesthesia. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia settings and adjustments for the three solutions were standardized to deliver equivalent drug doses. Pain scores (rest, cough, and ambulation), side effects (nausea, pruritus, sedation, motor block, hypotension, and orthostasis), and patient-controlled epidural analgesia consumption were measured for 48 h. RESULTS: All three solutions produced equivalent analgesia. Motor block was significantly more common (30 vs. 0%) and more intense with the 0.2% ropivacaine-4 microg fentanyl solution. Other side effects were equivalent between solutions and mild in severity. A significantly smaller volume of 0.2% ropivacaine-4 microg fentanyl solution was used, whereas the 0.1% ropivacaine-2 microg fentanyl group used a significantly greater amount of ropivacaine and fentanyl. CONCLUSIONS: Lesser concentrations of ropivacaine and fentanyl provide comparable analgesia with less motor block despite the use of similar amounts of ropivacaine and fentanyl. This finding suggests that concentration of local anesthetic solution at low doses is a primary determinant of motor block with patient-controlled epidural analgesia after lower abdominal surgery.     

Patient supplemented epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery with bupivacaine/fentanyl or ropivacaine/fentanyl

PURPOSE: To compare analgesic efficacy and occurrence of motor block and other side effects during patient supplemented epidural analgesia (PSEA) with either ropivacaine/fentanyl or bupivacaine/fentanyl mixtures. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, 32 ASAI-III patients undergoing major abdominal surgery received an epidural catheter at the T8- T10, followed by integrated general epidural anesthesia. Postoperative epidural analgesia was provided using a patient controlled pump with either ropivacaine 0.2%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group Ropivacaine, n = 16) or bupivacaine 0.125%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group Bupivacaine, n = 16) [background infusion 4-6 ml x hr(-1), 1.5 ml Incremental Doses and 20 min lock out]. Verbal pain rating score, number of incremental doses, consumption of epidural analgesic solution and rescue analgesics, sedation (four-point scale), and pulse oximetry were recorded by a blind observer for 48 hr after surgery. RESULTS: No differences in pain relief, motor block, degree of sedation, pulse oximetry and other side effects were observed between the two groups. The number of incremental doses and the volume of analgesic solution infused epidurally were higher in patients receiving the bupivacaine/fentanyl mixture (10 [0-52] I.D. and 236 [204-340] ml) than in patients receiving the ropivacaine/fentanyl solution (5 [0-50] I.D. and 208 [148-260] ml) (P = 0.03 and P = 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION: Using a ropivacaine 0.2%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl mixture for patient supplemented epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery provided similar successful pain relief as bupivacaine 0.125%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl, but patients receiving bupivacaine/fentanyl requested more supplemental.     

Advantage of ropivacaine for postoperative epidural analgesia following leg orthopedic surgery

BACKGROUND: Epidural administration of local anesthetics may lead to effective pain relief. However, tachyphylaxis or other problems following prolonged epidural anesthesia may develop and in many cases difficulties exist in the maintenance of the similar degree of sensory blockade. The present study was therefore performed to investigate the analgesic effect of continuous postoperative epidural infusion of ropivacaine with fentanyl in comparison with that of bupivacaine or ropivacaine alone. METHODS: After leg orthopedic surgery with lumbar combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, thirty-six patients were randomized to one of the three postoperative epidural infusion groups: bupivacaine 0.125%, ropivacaine 0.2%, or ropivacaine 0.2% with 2.2 microg x ml(-1) (400 microg x 180 ml(-1)) of fentanyl. Continuous epidural infusion was started at a rate of 6 ml x h(-1) with possibility of an additional bolus injection of 3 ml at least every 60 min. Pain was assessed using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) just before and 15 min after epidural bolus injections, and 15-20 h after the start of continuous epidural infusion as the severe at pain through the observation. The spread of analgesia (loss of sharpness in pinprick perception) and motor block (Bromage scale) were evaluated bilaterally. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate were also measured. RESULTS: The epidural bolus infusion was associated with a significant decrease of VAS (P < 0.001) and stable blood pressure and heart rate in all groups. The maximal VAS in patients receiving 0.2% ropivacaine+fentanyl was significantly less compared to that in the other two groups. The regression of sensory blockade was significantly prolonged in patients treated with ropivacaine+fentanyl. There was no significant difference in the spread of sensory analgesia between 20 min and 15-20 h after the continuous epidural anesthesia in this group. None of the patients developed adverse effects such as respiratory depression, nausea, and pruritis. CONCLUSIONS: Epidural injection of ropivacaine with fentanyl decreased postoperative pain with stable vital signs in patients undergoing leg orthopedic surgery, as compared to bupivacaine or ropivacaine alone, possibly because of the maintenance of sensory blockade by ropivacaine and enhancement of this sensory blockade by fentanyl.     

Comparison of ropivacaine 0.1%-fentanyl and bupivacaine 0.125% — fentanyl infusions for epidural labour analgesia

PURPOSE: To compare analgesic efficacies of ropivacaine-fentanyl and bupivacaine-fentanyl infusions for labour epidural analgesia. METHODS: In this double- blind, randomized study 100, term, nulliparous women were enrolled. Lumbar epidural analgesia (LEA) was started at cervical dilatation < 5 cm using either bupivacaine 0.25% followed by bupivacaine 0.125% + 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl infusion (n=50) or ropivacaine 0.2% followed by ropivacaine 0.1% + 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl infusion (n=50). Every hour maternal vital signs, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, sensory levels, and motor block (Bromage score) were assessed. Data were expressed as mean +/-1 SD and analyzed using Chi -Squared and Mann-Whitney U tests at <0.05. RESULTS: The onset times were 10.62+/-4.9 and 11.3+/-4.7 min for the bupivacaine and ropivacaine groups respectively (P = NS). The median VAS scores were not different between the groups at any of the evaluation periods. However, at least 80% of patients in the ropivacaine group had no demonstrable motor block after the first hour compared with only 55% of patients given bupivacaine (P =0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both bupivacaine and ropivacaine produce satisfactory labour analgesia. However, ropivacaine infusion is associated with less motor block throughout the first stage of labour and at 10 cm dilatation.     

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.     

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。     

A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia fentanyl and alfentanil for labour analgesia

PURPOSE: To determine the analgesic efficacy of equipotent doses of PCA (patient-controlled analgesia) fentanyl and PCA alfentanil for labour pain. METHODS: Twenty three, ASA I - II parturients between 32-42 wk gestational age in whom epidural analgesia was contraindicated were randomized to receive PCA fentanyl (Group F)or alfentanil (Group A). Plain numbered vials contained 21 ml fentanyl 50 microg x ml(-1) or alfentanil 500 microg x ml(-1). A one millilitre loading dose was administered. The PCA solution was prepared by diluting 10 ml study drug with 40 ml saline and the PCA pump was programmed to deliver a dose of 2 ml, delay of five minutes and a basal rate of 2 ml x hr(-1). Maternal measurements obtained were hourly drug dose, total dose, Visual Analog Pain Score (VAPS) q 30 min, sedation score q 1 hr and side effects. Neonates were assessed by 1,5, and 10-min Apgar scores, umbilical venous and arterial blood gases and neurobehavioural scores at four and 24 hr. RESULTS: Mean VAPS from 7 - 10 cm cervical dilatation were higher in Group A than in Group F (85.7+/-13.9 vs. 64.6+/-12.1; P<0.01) There were no inter-group differences in VAPS from 1-3 cm, or from 4-6 cm dilatation, in maternal sedation scores or side effects, or in neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: In the doses prescribed in this study, PCA fentanyl was found to provide more effective analgesia in late first stage labour than PCA alfentanil.     

Epidural naloxone reduces pruritus and nausea without affecting analgesia by epidural morphine in bupivacaine

PURPOSE: To determine whether epidural naloxone preserved analgesia while minimizing side effects caused by epidural morphine. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing combined epidural and general anesthesia for hysterectomy were randomly assigned to one of four groups. All received 2 mg epidural morphine bolus one hour before the end of surgery and a continuous epidural infusion was started containing 4 mg morphine in 100 ml bupivacaine 0.125% with either no naloxone (Group 1, n = 20), 0.083 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 2, n = 20), 0.125 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 3, n = 20) or 0.167 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 4, n = 20). Analgesia and side effects were evaluated by blinded observers. RESULTS: The combination of epidural morphine and bupivacaine provided good analgesia. Eight hours after the end of surgery, the pain score in the group receiving the highest dose of naloxone was lower than in the control group (VAS 1.2 vs. 2.0, P<0.05) but there was less pruritus in the high-dose naloxone group (itching score 1.3 vs. 1.9, P<0.05). Pain scores were no different in any of the naloxone groups from the control group. Itching was less in both of the higher dose naloxone groups (P<0.05 at 8, 16, and 32 hours). The incidence of vomiting in the control group was 40% vs. 5% for high dose naloxone group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural naloxone reduced morphine-induced side effects in dose-dependent fashion without reversal of the analgesic effect.     

Comparison of Three Solutions of Ropivacaine/Fentanyl for Postoperative Patient-controlled Epidural Analgesia

Background: Ropivacaine, 0.2%, is a new local anesthetic approved for epidural analgesia. The addition of 4 [micro sign]g/ml fentanyl improves analgesia from epidural ropivacaine. Use of a lower concentration of ropivacaine-fentanyl may further improve analgesia or decrease side effects.

Methods: Thirty patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive one of three solutions: 0.2% ropivacaine-4 [micro sign]g fentanyl, 0.1% ropivacaine-2 [micro sign]g fentanyl, or 0.05% ropivacaine-1 [micro sign]g fentanyl for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after standardized combined epidural and general anesthesia. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia settings and adjustments for the three solutions were standardized to deliver equivalent drug doses. Pain scores (rest, cough, and ambulation), side effects (nausea, pruritus, sedation, motor block, hypotension, and orthostasis), and patient-controlled epidural analgesia consumption were measured for 48 h.

Results: All three solutions produced equivalent analgesia. Motor block was significantly more common (30 vs. 0%) and more intense with the 0.2% ropivacaine-4 [micro sign]g fentanyl solution. Other side effects were equivalent between solutions and mild in severity. A significantly smaller volume of 0.2% ropivacaine-4 [micro sign]g fentanyl solution was used, whereas the 0.1% ropivacaine-2 [micro sign]g fentanyl group used a significantly greater amount of ropivacaine and fentanyl.     

Ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) does not decrease the need for epidural fentanyl after hip replacement surgery

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is a new long-acting local anesthetic. Laboratory trials have demonstrated a synergistic analgesic effect between intrathecal opioids and local anesthetics. We tested the hypothesis that addition of ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) to epidural fentanyl (10 microg x ml(-1)) postoperatively decreases the need for fentanyl, improves the quality of analgesia and decreases the side-effects of fentanyl. METHODS: Forty patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized study to receive either fentanyl 10 microg x ml(-1) (group F) alone or fentanyl combined with ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) (group R) for 20 h as an epidural infusion at TH12-L1 or L1-L2 for analgesia after hip replacement surgery. The patients were free to use a patient-controlled epidural analgesia device, which was programmed to infuse 3 ml of the study medication hourly and to allow a 3-ml bolus when needed (maximal hourly dose of fentanyl was 150 microg). The consumption of medication, visual pain scores at rest and on movement, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, motor and sensory block, nausea, pruritus and sedation were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups in the total mean fentanyl consumption (1.10+/-0.18 mg in group F, 1.08+/-0.31 mg in group R, 95% CI: -0.14 to 0.19, P = 0.774). The pain scores were similar at rest (median scores < or = 1) and on movement (median scores < or = 3). The adverse effects were similar and of a minor nature, consisting mostly of pruritus and nausea. CONCLUSION: Addition of ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) to epidural fentanyl 10 microg x ml(-1) did not significantly decrease the requirement for fentanyl administered for pain relief after hip replacement surgery.     

The analgesic effect of sufentanil combined with ropivacaine 0.2% for labor analgesia: a comparison of three sufentanil doses

The combination of opioids with local anesthetics is commonly used for epidural labor analgesia. We examined whether increasing sufentanil in doses of 5, 10, and 15 microg prolonged the duration of labor analgesia produced by ropivacaine. One hundred healthy parturients in the first stage of labor who requested epidural analgesia were enrolled. Parturients were randomized to receive 12 mL ropivacaine 0.2% alone or with sufentanil 5 microg, sufentanil 10 microg, or sufentanil 15 microg. The duration of analgesia, pain score, degree of motor blockade (using a four-point Bromage scale), heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and incidence of nausea and pruritus were recorded. The mean duration of epidural analgesia was 96 +/- 32 min for patients without sufentanil, 134 +/- 27 min for Group 5 (p < 0.01 versus control), 135 +/- 33 min for Group 10 (p < 0.01 versus control), 130 +/- 33 min for Group 15 (p < 0.01 versus control) without differences among sufentanil groups. Between 30 and 90 min, the sufentanil groups (5 microg, 10 microg, and 15 microg) had lower pain scores than the control group (p < 0.01 versus control) but there were no differences among the sufentanil groups. No patient in any group had a Bromage score more than 1. No significant difference was found for opioid-related side effects. We conclude that 5-10 or 15 microg sufentanil induced a similar prolongation of analgesia when combined with ropivacaine 0.2% for initiation of labor analgesia. Implications: We studied the effect of adding one of three possible sufentanil doses to epidural ropivacaine 0.2% for labor analgesia. Adding sufentanil increased the duration of analgesia but there was no advantage in adding more than 5 microg of sufentanil.     

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.     

Comparison of bupivacaine 0.2% and ropivacaine 0.2% combined with fentanyl for epidural analgesia during labour

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent clinical studies comparing ropivacaine 0.25% with bupivacaine 0.25% reported not only comparable analgesia, but also comparable motor block for epidural analgesia during labour. An opioid can be combined with local anaesthetic to reduce the incidence of side-effects and to improve analgesia for the relief of labour pain. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effects of epidural bupivacaine 0.2% compared with ropivacaine 0.2% combined with fentanyl for the initiation and maintenance of analgesia during labour and delivery. METHODS: Sixty labouring nulliparous women were randomly allocated to receive either bupivacaine 0.2% with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) (B/F), or ropivacaine 0.2% with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) (R/F). For the initiation of epidural analgesia, 8 mL of the study solution was administered. Supplemental analgesia was obtained with 4 mL of the study solution according to parturients' needs when their pain was > or = 4 on a visual analogue scale. Analgesia, hourly local anaesthetic use, motor block, patient satisfaction and side-effects between groups were evaluated during labour and at delivery. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled and 53 completed the study. No differences in verbal pain scores, hourly local anaesthetic use or patient satisfaction between groups were observed. However, motor block was observed in 10 patients in the B/F group whereas only two patients had motor block in the R/F group (P < 0.05). The incidence of instrumental delivery was also higher in the B/F group than in the R/F group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that epidural bupivacaine 0.2% and ropivacaine 0.2% combined with fentanyl produced equivalent analgesia for pain relief during labour and delivery. It is concluded that ropivacaine 0.2% combined with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) provided effective analgesia with significantly less motor block and need for an instrumental delivery than a bupivacaine/fentanyl combination at the same concentrations during labour and delivery.     

Ropivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) by epidural infusion for labour analgesia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) via epidural for analgesia in labour. METHODS: In a randomized study, 80 nulliparous parturients in labour had epidural analgesia initiated with 0.2% ropivacaine and fentanyl and were then randomized to receive either 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) at 10mL h(-1) (Group R1, n = 38) or 0.2% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) at 8 ml h(-1) (Group R2, n = 39) as epidural infusions. Supplementary analgesia was provided on request with ropivacaine 0.2% 5 mL as an epidural bolus. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the visual analogue pain scores either with respect to motor block or sensory block. The amount of local anaesthetic used was lower in the 0.1% ropivacaine group than in the 0.2% ropivacaine group (P = 0.001). Side-effects, patient satisfaction, labour outcome and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: An epidural infusion of 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) at 10 mL h(-1) provided adequate analgesia in the first stage of labour. The level of analgesia was similar to that obtained using 0.2% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) and with no differences with regard to motor or sensory block.     

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.     

Effectiveness of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia following thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: Epidural ropivacaine is now a common drug used for postoperative analgesia. However, little information is available concerning regression of sensory blockade and analgesia following prolonged epidural infusion of ropivacaine. We investigated the efficacy of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing thoracic surgery were enrolled. After surgery with general and thoracic epidural anesthesia, continuous epidural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine+fentanyl (1.67 microg x ml(-1)) was started at a rate of 6 ml x h(-1) for patients whose height was more than 155 cm and 4 ml x h(-1) for those below 155 cm with possibility of an additional bolus injection of 3 ml at least every 60 min. RESULTS: An additional epidural injection of 3 ml produced a decrease in VAS without significant changes of vital signs. The greatest VAS was 10+/-25 mm in the incision site and 36+/-38 mm in the ipsilateral shoulder. Sensory blockade was sustained until the morning after the day of surgery. Also blood pressure and heart rate were stable throughout the observation period. There were no adverse effects except for slight nausea in three patients. CONCLUSIONS: A bolus of 3 ml with continuous 4-6 ml x h(-1) epidural injection of ropivacaine plus a small dose of fentanyl would decrease postoperative pain with stable vital signs in patients after thoracic surgery.     

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.     

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.