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.     

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

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

Fentanyl added to bupivacaine 0.05% or ropivacaine 0.05% in patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Epidural analgesia is the most effective method for pain relief during labour. The aim was to elucidate the efficacy of ropivacaine 0.05% and bupivacaine 0.05%, which were both combined with fentanyl 0.00015% to provide analgesia in labour. METHODS: Forty nulliparous females were enrolled into the study. After insertion of an epidural catheter, patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Once the os uteri had dilated to 4-5 cm, a bolus of bupivacaine 0.125% 10mL + fentanyl 50 microg (1 mL) in Group 1 patients, and ropivacaine 0.125% 10mL + fentanyl 50 microg (1 mL) in Group 2 patients was administered via the epidural catheter. Then, patient-controlled epidural analgesia was started with a basal infusion of bupivacaine 0.05% 10 mLh(-1) + fentanyl 0.00015% 1.5 pgmL(-1) in Group 1, and ropivacaine 0.05% + fentanyl 1.5 microgmL(-1) in Group 2. When needed, a 10 mL bolus infusion could be given and the lockout time was 20 min. Maternal and fetal haemodynamic variables were monitored before induction and subsequently at 5 min intervals. Using a visual analogue scale assessed the degree of pain. RESULTS: Maternal haemodynamic variables and Apgar scores were not different between the two groups. The second stage of the labour was shorter in Group 2 (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in patients' assessment of motor block or mode of delivery between groups. CONCLUSIONS: An epidural infusion (10 mLh(-1)) of bupivacaine 0.05% or ropivacaine 0.05% together with fentanyl 1.5 microg mL(-1) provided good and safe analgesia during labour.     

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.     

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.     

Comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes with epidural bupivacaine plus fentanyl and ropivacaine plus fentanyl for labor analgesia

BACKGROUND: Several studies have been performed to find a safe method of labor analgesia with minimal side effects and toxicity in mother and fetus. We aimed to compare the efficacy and side effects of epidural bupivacaine plus fentanyl and ropivacaine plus fentanyl at low concentrations. METHOD: Forty ASA I-II parturients' were included in this prospective, double-blind, trial and randomized to receive either bupivacaine or ropivacaine for labor analgesia. Analgesia was initiated with 8 mL of 0.125% solution plus fentanyl 50 microg and maintained with a continuous infusion of 0.0625% solution with fentanyl 2 microg/mL. RESULTS: There were no differences in pain scores, total dose of local anesthetics used, sensory or motor blockade, labor duration, mode of delivery, side effects, patient satisfaction, or neonatal outcome between the two local anesthetics at these dosages, but at the end of the second stage and delivery, adequate analgesia quality could not be ensured. CONCLUSION: We found no major advantage of continuous epidural infusion of ropivacaine 0.0625% plus fentanyl 2 microg/mL over bupivacaine 0.0625% plus fentanyl 2 microg/mL for labor analgesia. We believe that different methods or dosages may be tried in order to improve comfort at the second stage of labor and the delivery.     

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.     

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

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

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.     

Paravertebral ropivacaine, 0.3%, and bupivacaine, 0.25%, provide similar pain relief after thoracotomy

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to determine whether ropivacaine plus fentanyl was as effective as bupivacaine plus fentanyl in a continuous thoracic paravertebral block after posterolateral thoracotomy. DESIGN: Patients were randomly assigned in a blinded fashion to receive 1 of 2 solutions for paravertebral analgesia. SETTING: Multi-institutional university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients undergoing elective thoracotomy. Interventions: A continuous paravertebral infusion of 0.1 mL/kg/h of either 0.3% ropivacaine/fentanyl, 3 microg/mL, or 0.25% bupivacaine/fentanyl, 3 microg/mL, was started on admission to the intensive care unit. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pain scores (rest, deep breathing, and coughing), spirometry, subcutaneous opioids, or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption and adverse events were assessed for 48 hours. Both techniques provided adequate pain relief for the first 2 days after posterolateral thoracotomy. There were no differences between groups in pain scores at rest, coughing, or movement. There was an improvement of spirometry values between the first and second day in both groups. There were no differences in the requirements for rescue analgesia and side effects between groups. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that both bupivacaine, 0.25%, and ropivacaine, 0.3%, with fentanyl are equally effective for post-thoracotomy pain control when used via continuous paravertebral blockade.     

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.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia after abdominal surgery: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine.

In this randomized, double-blinded study we sought to assess the analgesic efficacy of ropivacaine and bupivacaine in combination with sufentanil and the efficacy of ropivacaine alone after major abdominal surgery. Sixty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery received standardized general anesthesia combined with epidural thoracic analgesia. They were allocated to one of three groups: the BS group received postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia with 0.125% bupivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil; the RS group received 0.125% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil; and the R group received 0.2% ropivacaine, with the patient-controlled epidural analgesia device set at bolus 2-3 mL and background infusion 3-5 mL/h. Visual analog scale scores were significantly lower during coughing in the BS group compared with the RS and R groups and in the RS group compared with the R group. The BS group required significantly less local anesthetic (milligrams per day) during the first three postoperative days compared with the RS and R groups, and the RS group, significantly less than the R group. No major side effects were noted in any group. We conclude that, after major abdominal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia was more effective with bupivacaine than with ropivacaine when these two local anesthetics are used in a mixture with sufentanil. Ropivacaine alone was less effective than ropivacaine in combination with sufentanil. IMPLICATIONS: After major abdominal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia was more effective with 0.125% bupivacaine than with 0.125% ropivacaine when these two local anesthetics were used in a mixture with 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil. Ropivacaine 0.2% alone was less effective than 0.125% ropivacaine combined with sufentanil.     

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.     

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

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

A randomized,double-blinded comparison of thoracic epidural ropivacaine,ropivacaine/fentanyl,or bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia

Epidural ropivacaine has not been compared with bupivacaine for postthoracotomy analgesia. Eighty patients undergoing elective lung surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive one of three solutions for high thoracic epidural analgesia. A continuous epidural infusion of 0.1 mL. kg(-1). h(-1) of either 0.2% ropivacaine, 0.15% ropivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL, or 0.1% bupivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL was started at admission to the intensive care unit. We assessed pain scores (rest and spirometry), IV morphine consumption, spirometry, hand grip strength, PaCO(2), heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and side effects (sedation, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus) for 48 h. Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief similar to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. The use of plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control during spirometry, larger consumption of IV morphine, and increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Morphine requirements were larger in the ropivacaine group, with no differences between bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl groups. Patients in the ropivacaine group experienced more pain and performed worse in spirometry than patients who received epidural fentanyl. There was no significant difference in motor block. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief and similar analgesia to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. Plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control and an increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia.     

Clinical effects and pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia during labor

OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy, pharmacokinetics and histamine release of ropivacaine and bupivacaine with fentanyl in continuous epidural perfusion during labor and childbirth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective study of 40 women at full-term pregnancy who requested epidural analgesia. The patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups of 20: group R received an initial bolus dose of 10 mL of 0.25% ropivacaine and group B received 0.25% bupivacaine, followed in both groups by epidural infusion of the assigned drugs at a concentration of 0.125% plus 0.30 mg of fentanyl at a rate of 5 mL/h through a patient-controlled analgesia device that allowed additional bolus doses. The studied variables were age, weight, height, sensory and motor block, mean blood pressure and maternal-fetal heart rates, number of bolus doses, total local anesthetic administered, duration and type of delivery, oxytocin increase, Apgar at 1 and 5 minutes, plasma levels of local anesthetic (30 minutes after the initial dose, at the end of dilation, in the umbilical vein, and 30 minutes after switching off the perfusion pump), time to clearance, elimination half-life, and a test of histamine release by radioimmunoassay. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in the course of labor or in Apgar scores. The plasma concentrations of ropivacaine were higher than those of bupivacaine (p<0.03). Clearance of both drugs was similar. The elimination half-life of ropivacaine was significantly less than that of bupivacaine (5.2 +/- 0.7 h vs. 10.8 +/- 1.06 h). CONCLUSIONS: Analgesia was equally effective in both groups, without adverse maternal-fetal effects, with spontaneous micturition and absence of motor blockade in both groups. The plasma concentrations were higher with ropivacaine but were not toxic.     

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 epidural neostigmine combined with ropivacaine and sufentanil on neuraxial analgesia during labor

Spinal neostigmine produces analgesia without respiratory depression or hypotension but provokes major gastrointestinal side effects. Epidural injection of this drug, however, appears to induce analgesia devoid of such side effects. In this study, we evaluated the effect of a bolus of epidural neostigmine on the duration and magnitude of analgesia in early labor and assessed its eventual sparing effect on subsequent local anesthetic requirements. Epidural neostigmine methylsulfate (maximal dose 4 microg/kg) was added to 10 mL of ropivacaine 0.1%, with and without sufentanil 10 microg, to initiate analgesia. Twenty minutes after injection, pain score, sensory level, and motor block were assessed. Time until request for supplemental epidural medication was also recorded. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with ropivacaine 0.1% was used for epidural supplementation. Maternal and fetal side effects were closely recorded. Neostigmine (4 microg/kg), when added to ropivacaine 10 mg, provided equivalent analgesia to ropivacaine 20 mg but was less effective than sufentanil 10 microg for the initiation of labor epidural analgesia. Further, neostigmine did not modify the subsequent patient-controlled epidural analgesia local anesthetic requirements during labor. No hemodynamic instability, additional motor block, or bothersome side effects were recorded. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of epidural neostigmine (4 microg/kg) with the local anesthetic ropivacaine, with or without sufentanil, does not significantly enhance neuraxial analgesia during labor. Such a dose, however, has no bothersome side effects.     

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.     

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.