Comparison of combined spinal-epidural and low dose epidural for labour analgesia

PURPOSE: To compare the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique with the epidural technique with regard to time to initiate and manage, motor block, onset of analgesia and satisfaction during labour. METHODS: Upon requesting analgesia, 50 healthy term parturients were randomized in a prospective, double-blind fashion to receive either CSE analgesia or lumbar epidural analgesia in the labour floor of a university hospital at an academic medical centre. The epidural group (n = 24) received bupivacaine 0.0625%-fentanyl 0.0002% with 0.05 ml in 10 ml local anesthetic sodium bicarbonate 8.4% and epinephrine 1:200,000. The CSE group (n = 26) received intrathecal 25 microg fentanyl and 2.5 mg bupivacaine. Additional analgesia was provided upon maternal request. RESULTS: There were no differences (P>0.05) in time to perform either technique, motor blockade, or parturient satisfaction or in the number of times that the anesthesiologist was called to perform any intervention. Although the first sign of analgesia was not different between the two groups, the onset of complete analgesia was more rapid with the CSE technique (Visual Analogue Pain Score (VAPS) at five minutes < three: 26/26 vs. 17/24, P+/-0.001). CONCLUSION: Although epidural analgesia with a low concentration of local anesthetic and opioid mixture takes longer to produce complete analgesia, it is a satisfactory alternative to CSE.     

A prospective, randomized evaluation of the effects of epidural needle rotation on the distribution of epidural block

We evaluated the effects of turning the tip of the Tuohy needle 45 degrees toward the operative side before threading the epidural catheter (45 degrees -rotation group, n = 24) as compared to a conventional insertion technique with the tip of the Tuohy needle oriented at 90 degrees cephalad (control group, n = 24) on the distribution of 10 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine with 10 microg sufentanil in 48 patients undergoing total hip replacement. The catheter was introduced 3 to 4 cm beyond the tip of the Tuohy needle. A blinded observer recorded sensory and motor blocks on both sides, quality of analgesia, and volumes of local anesthetic used during the first 48 h of patient-controlled epidural analgesia. Readiness to surgery required 21 +/- 6 min in the control group and 17 +/- 7 min in the 45 degree-rotation group (P > 0.50). The maximum sensory level reached on the operative side was T10 (T10-7) in the control group and T9 (T10-6) in the 45 degree-rotation group (P > 0.50); whereas the maximum sensory level reached on the nonoperative side was T10 (T12-9) in the control group and L3 (L5-T12) in the 45 degree-rotation group (P = 0.0005). Complete motor blockade of the operative limb was achieved earlier in the 45 degree-rotation than in the control group, and motor block of the nonoperative side was more intense in patients in the control group. Two-segment regression of sensory level on the surgical side was similar in the two groups, but occurred earlier on the nonoperative side in the 45 degree-rotation group (94 +/- 70 min) than in the control group (178 +/- 40 min) (P = 0.0005). Postoperative analgesia was similar in the 2 groups, but the 45 degree-rotation group consumed less local anesthetic (242 +/- 35 mL) than the control group (297 +/- 60 mL) (P = 0.0005). We conclude that the rotation of the Tuohy introducer needle 45 degrees toward the operative side before threading the epidural catheter provides a preferential distribution of sensory and motor block toward the operative side, reducing the volume of local anesthetic solution required to maintain postoperative analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: Turning the Tuohy introducer needle 45 degrees toward the operative side before threading the epidural catheter is a simple maneuver that produces a preferential distribution of epidural anesthesia and analgesia toward the operative side, minimizing the volume of local anesthetic required to provide adequate pain relief after total hip arthroplasty.     

Intrathecal sufentanil and fetal heart rate abnormalities: a double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial comparing two forms of combined spinal epidural analgesia with epidural analgesia in labor

Combined spinal epidural analgesia (CSE) for labor pain relief has become increasingly popular. However, the effect of intrathecal sufentanil on the incidence of uterine hyperactivity and fetal heart rate (FHR) abnormalities remains controversial. We hypothesized that the use of intrathecal sufentanil in a dose of 7.5 microg is more likely to induce a nonreassuring FHR tracing than a small dose of spinal sufentanil combined with bupivacaine or epidural analgesia. Three-hundred parturients were randomized into three groups. In the first group, epidural analgesia was initiated with 12.5 mg of bupivacaine, 12.5 microg of epinephrine, and 7.5 microg of sufentanil in a volume of 10 mL (EPD group). In Group 2, initial intrathecal analgesia consisted of 2.5 mg of bupivacaine, 2.5 microg of epinephrine, and 1.5 microg of sufentanil (BSE group); in Group 3, spinal analgesia consisted of 7.5 microg of sufentanil (SUF group). Analgesia was maintained in all groups with patient-controlled epidural analgesia using bupivacaine 0.125%, 1.25 microg/mL of epinephrine, and 0.75 microg/mL of sufentanil (bolus, 4 mL; lockout, 15 min). Cardiotocography was monitored continuously 15 min before analgesia and for 60 min after the start of analgesia. The quality of analgesia, labor, and neonatal outcome and side effects were recorded. Twenty-four percent of patients in the SUF group developed FHR abnormalities (bradycardia or late decelerations) during the first hour after initiation of analgesia compared with 12% in the BSE group and 11% in the EPD group. Uterine hyperactivity occurred in 12% of parturients in the SUF group but in only 2% in the other groups. Onset of analgesia was more rapid in both CSE groups as compared with the EPD group. However, 29% of patients in the BSE group developed severe hypotension, requiring IV ephedrine (29% in the BSE group versus 7% and 12% in the EPD and SUF groups, respectively). All these differences reached statistical significance. The present data corroborate previous recommendations of caution when performing CSE using a large dose (7.5 microg or more) of spinal sufentanil because of the risk of uterine hyperactivity and FHR abnormalities. IMPLICATIONS: Combined spinal epidural analgesia (CSE) produces pain relief during labor. Fetal heart rate changes after CSE using intrathecal sufentanil have been reported. We performed a randomized, blinded trial confirming that fetal heart rate changes are more frequent after CSE using 7.5 micro g of intrathecal sufentanil as compared with other forms of neuraxial labor analgesia.     

A comparison of Espocan and Tuohy needles for the combined spinal-epidural technique for labor analgesia

When using the needle-through-needle combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique for labor analgesia, failure to obtain cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), paresthesias, and intrathecal or intravascular migration of the catheter are of concern. Epidural needles with spinal needle apertures, such as the back-hole Espocan (ES) needles, are available and may reduce these risks. We describe the efficacy and adverse events associated with a modified epidural needle (ES) versus a conventional Tuohy needle for CSE. One-hundred parturients requesting labor analgesia (CSE) were randomized into 2 groups: 50-ES 18-gauge modified epidural needle with 27-gauge Pencan atraumatic spinal needle, 50-conventional 18-gauge Tuohy needle with 27-gauge Gertie Marx atraumatic spinal needle. Information on intrathecal or intravascular catheter placement, paresthesia on introduction of spinal needle, failure to obtain CSF through the spinal needle after placement of epidural needle, unintentional dural puncture, and epidural catheter function was obtained. No intrathecal catheter placement occurred in either group. Rates of intravascular catheter placement and unintentional dural puncture were similar between the groups. Significant differences were noted regarding spinal needle-induced paresthesia (14% ES versus 42% Tuohy needles, P = 0.009) and failure to obtain CSF on first attempt (8% ES versus 28% Tuohy needles, P < 0.02). Use of ES needles for CSE significantly reduces paresthesia associated with the insertion of the spinal needle and is associated with more frequent successful spinal needle placement on the first attempt. IMPLICATIONS: The use of modified epidural needles with a back hole for combined spinal-epidural technique significantly reduces paresthesia associated with the insertion of the spinal needle and is associated with more frequent successful spinal needle placement on the first attempt.     

High quality labour analgesia using small gauge epidural needles and catheters

PURPOSE: Inadvertent epidural needle punctures represent the leading cause of severe postdural puncture headache (PDPH) in parturients. Use of small gauge (G) epidural needles for continuous analgesia has received little attention despite possible important reductions in PDPH. We report the first study to examine the feasibility of using small G Tuohy needles and 23 G catheters for labour analgesia. METHODS: Healthy parturients 30 min), recognized dural puncture, PDPH, patient assessment of analgesia within 24 hr of delivery, complications and anesthesiologist satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-seven parturients were recruited. Successful blocks were initiated and maintained in 24/27 who rated overall analgesia from good to excellent (19/24 very good to excellent). Three block failures occurred at the initiation phase only (two unilateral, one absent). There was no evidence of catheter kinking after placement. One patient developed PDPH after unrecognized dural puncture which was self-treated with acetaminophen for four days, followed by complete symptom resolution. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to provide high quality labour analgesia using small G epidural needles and catheters. The effect of small G epidural needles on PDPH warrants future study.     

The injection of intrathecal normal saline reduces the severity of postdural puncture headache

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We investigated whether the injection of 10 mL of normal saline into the subarachnoid space following accidental dural puncture reduced the incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) and the need for epidural blood patch (EBP). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients who experienced accidental dural puncture with an epidural needle had 10 mL of normal saline injected into the subarachnoid space. In 22 patients, the injection was performed immediately through the epidural needle. In 6 patients who had intrathecal catheters placed through the epidural needle, the saline was injected through the catheter before removal. All other patients who experienced wet taps during the same period that the study was in progress but did not receive the saline injection served as a control group, 26 in number. Patients with severe or persistent PDPHs were treated with EBP. RESULTS: Of those patients who received intrathecal normal saline immediately through the epidural needle, 32% developed a headache compared with 62% of controls. Of these, 1 patient who received saline required EBP compared with nine in the control group (P =.004). Of those patients who had intrathecal catheters placed, there were no headaches in the saline group of 6 compared with 3 in the control group of 5, 1 of whom was treated with EBP (P >.05). CONCLUSIONS: The immediate injection of 10 mL intrathecal normal saline after a wet tap significantly reduced the incidence of PDPH and the need for EBP. When an intrathecal catheter had been placed following a wet tap, injection of 10 mL of normal saline before its removal effectively prevented PDPH.     

Coiling of lumbar epidural catheters

BACKGROUND: The difficulties in threading an epidural catheter to vertebral levels remote to the puncture level have been well documented. This study was undertaken to determine the length that a single orifice epidural catheter can be threaded into the lumbar space without coiling (coiling length), and whether this is affected by the direction of the epidural needle bevel. METHODS: Forty-five young male patients scheduled for surgery under epidural analgesia were enrolled. The epidural space was identified using a midline approach at the L(2-3) or L(3-4) interspace with the loss of resistance to air technique. A 19-G single-orifice epidural catheter (Flextip Plus, Arrow International, Inc, Reading, PA, USA) was inserted through a Tuohy needle oriented either cephalad (n=20) or caudad (n=25). During insertion, the path and the position of the catheter tip was determined by fluoroscopy using iohexol dye. RESULTS: The median coiling length was 2.8 cm, ranging from 1.0 to 8.0 cm. Only 13% of epidural catheters could be threaded 4 cm beyond the tip of the needle without coiling. No significant difference was found in coiling length between the cephalad group (2.9 cm) and the caudad group (2.5 cm). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that coiling length is independent of whether the bevel of the Tuohy needle is directed cephalad or caudad. We recommend that an optimal insertion depth of an end-hole single orifice catheter is 3 cm.     

Role of repeated epidural injections in preventing post-spinal hearing loss

Study ObjectiveTo determine if epidural volume extension and continued postoperative epidural injections prevent hearing loss associated with a 23-gauge (G) Quincke spinal needle.DesignProspective, double blinded trial.SettingOperating rooms.Patients30 adult patients scheduled for lower abdominal or perineal surgery during spinal anesthesia.InterventionsPatients were divided into two groups of 15 each. All patients received subarachnoid injection with a 23-G Quincke needle. While patients in Group S received a single-shot spinal, Group E patients underwent epidural catheter placement one intervertebral space above. The epidural catheter was bolused with 10 mL of normal saline followed by postoperative epidural boluses of local anesthetic for analgesia as needed.MeasurementsPatients’ auditory function was evaluated by pure tone audiometry (frequencies of 250-8,000 Hz) on the day before and two days after receiving the spinal anesthesia.Main ResultsUnilateral low-frequency hearing loss (500 Hz) was seen in Group S (P < 0.05). It was prevented by the repeated epidural injections as used in Group E.ConclusionFollowing spinal anesthesia, epidural volume extension with 10 mL of normal saline followed by epidural local anesthetic boluses titrated to adequate postoperative analgesia (6-8 mL each time) prevents post-spinal hearing loss.     

Baricity, Needle Direction, and Intrathecal Sufentanil Labor Analgesia

Background: Intrathecal sufentanil relieves labor pain but centrally mediated side effects are common. Preventing rostral spread of intrathecal sufentanil should limit these side effects. Both direction of the lateral opening of a pencil-point needle and drug baricity modify the spread of intrathecal local anesthetics. This randomized, prospective, double-blind study examines the effects of these variables on intrathecal sufentanil labor analgesia.

Methods: Forty laboring, full-term parturients, whose cervixes were dilated less than 5 cm and who requested analgesia for labor were enrolled. Combined spinal epidural analgesia was induced in patients in the sitting position. They were allocated to receive 10 micro gram intrathecal sufentanil diluted with either normal saline or dextrose with the aperture of the pencil-point needle directed cephalad or caudad during drug injection. Thus there were four groups of ten patients: dextrose up, dextrose down, saline up, and saline down. Sufentanil was diluted with normal saline to a concentration of 10 micro gram/ml. The study drug was made by mixing 1 ml sufentanil solution with either 1 ml 10% dextrose or 1 ml normal saline. Visual analog scores for pain, pruritus, nausea, and pain relief were recorded before and 5, 10, 15, and 30 min after drug injection.

Results: Baricity, but not needle orientation, influenced pain relief and pruritus. Sufentanil in dextrose produced less itching but also less analgesia. Nine of 20 women in the dextrose groups compared with 1 of 20 in the saline groups requested additional analgesia by 30 min.     

Automated regular boluses for epidural analgesia: a comparison with continuous infusion

BACKGROUND: Intermittent epidural bolus dosing is a method of drug delivery that can prolong the duration of labour analgesia induced by a combined spinal epidural (CSE). In this randomized, double-blinded study, we compared the analgesic efficacy of two drug delivery systems: regular intermittent epidural boluses and continuous epidural infusion and assessed the incidence of breakthrough pain after CSE. METHODS: With the approval of the Hospital Ethics Committee, we recruited 60 parturients into this randomized controlled trial. A CSE was performed with intrathecal fentanyl 25 mug in all patients. The parturients were then randomly allocated into two groups. The infusion group received a continuous epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL at a rate of 10 mL/h. The bolus group received 5-mL epidural boluses every half hour. The sample size was computed to detect a 40% reduction in the rate of breakthrough pain. RESULTS: The bolus group had a lower incidence of breakthrough pain than the infusion group (10% vs. 37%, P < 0.05). The bolus group also had significantly higher satisfaction scores for labour analgesia: 97+/-8 (mean+/-SD) vs. 89+/-7 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Automated regular bolus delivery of epidural analgesia when compared with continuous infusion decreased the incidence of breakthrough pain and increased maternal satisfaction. In a busy obstetric unit, this may also serve to decrease the anesthetists' workload.     

Relationship between the bevel of the Tuohy needle and catheter direction in thoracic epidural anesthesia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Directing an epidural catheter cephalad or caudad is usually attempted by orienting the beveled edge of the epidural needle. However, there have been few studies about the relationship between the direction of the bevel of epidural needle and the resulting position of the catheter. We studied this relationship in thoracic epidural catheter placement. Catheter position was confirmed by using picture archiving communication systems (PACS). PACS is a workstation that stores radiologic images, which can be manipulated to visualize the catheters. METHODS: One hundred six patients receiving thoracic epidural anesthesia were enrolled. The cephalad and caudad groups (each with 53 patients) received epidural anesthesia at the T6-7 interspace with either a cephalad- or caudal-directed Tuohy needle. The final position of all of the catheters was confirmed by PACS. RESULTS: In the cephalad group, 63.5% of the catheters were confirmed to travel in a cephalad direction. In the caudad group, 22.0% of the catheters advanced in a caudad direction. Curling of the catheters occurred in 17.6%. PACS showed the catheter positions with satisfactory quality. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between bevel direction and location of the thoracic epidural catheter was relatively low. Practices such as threading an epidural catheter by manipulation of the Tuohy needle for the control of pain at a distant site may not yield good results.     

Either sufentanil or fentanyl, in addition to intrathecal bupivacaine, provide satisfactory early labour analgesia

PURPOSE: The study was aimed primarily at comparing the duration of analgesia produced by intrathecal fentanyl 25 microg with sufentanil 5 microg when added to bupivacaine 1.25 mg as the initial component of the combined spinal epidural (CSE) technique in early labour. METHODS: Forty healthy parturients were randomly assigned into two groups to receive either intrathecal sufentanil 5 microg plus bupivacaine 1.25 mg (Group S) or intrathecal fentanyl 25 microg plus bupivacaine 1.25 mg (Group F). Apart from the duration of analgesia, pain scores and side effects were also evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the duration of analgesia (mean 109 +/- SD 49 min in Group F vs 118 +/- 54 min in Group S, P=0.9). Group F had a more rapid onset of analgesia (P <0.05) and a higher cephalad block (median T4 vs T7, P <0.05) in the first 30 min after the block. No difference in the side effects was detected. CONCLUSION: Fentanyl 25 microg is a good alternative to sufentanil 5 microg when added to bupivacaine 1.25 mg for early labour analgesia.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with fentanyl-bupivacaine: influence of prior dural puncture

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSEA) involves the epidural administration of local anesthetic and opioid solutions adjacent to the prior dural puncture, potentially increasing their diffusion into the subarachnoid space. This study was designed to evaluate the influence of dural puncture on the adequacy and extent of analgesia, and drugs requirements of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) in the postoperative period. METHODS: In this prospective double-blind study, 40 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery under general anesthesia followed with PCEA were randomly assigned to either group I (preoperative insertion of an epidural catheter) or group II (preoperative dural puncture with a 25-g Quincke needle + insertion of an epidural catheter). Postoperatively, a PCEA pump delivered an infusion of 0.1% bupivacaine + fentanyl (3 microg/mL) at 5 mL/h. Participants were allowed to self-administer 5-mL boluses of the same solution with a 15-minute lock-out interval. Hourly epidural solution requirements were recorded for 40 hours. Sensory and motor block, and pain scores were also analyzed. RESULTS: There was no difference between groups with regard to epidural solution requirements, pain scores, spread of sensory blockade, or intensity of motor block. CONCLUSION: Dural puncture with a 25-gauge Quincke needle, performed as part of CSEA, does not influence the drug requirements when a combination of 0.1% bupivacaine and fentanyl (3 microg/mL) is used for PCEA after major abdominal surgery.     

A comparison of epidural and cerebrospinal fluid glucose in parturients at term: an observational study

BackgroundDetecting inadvertent dural puncture during labour epidural insertion can be difficult when using a loss of resistance to saline technique. Testing fluid for glucose that leaks from a Tuohy needle may confirm the presence of cerebrospinal fluid and infer inadvertent dural puncture. This study compared the glucose content of intrathecal fluid obtained during spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean delivery with that of fluid from a Tuohy needle or epidural catheter when establishing epidural analgesia for labour.MethodsWomen aged ?18 years undergoing elective caesarean delivery and labouring parturients who requested epidural analgesia were recruited prospectively in a tertiary referral centre over a three-month period. Fluid was collected into a sterile container either during spinal anaesthesia or from a labour epidural needle. Glucose content was evaluated using a bedside blood glucometer and laboratory colorimetric analyzer.ResultsOf the 118 women approached, 115 participated. All 40 women having spinal anaesthesia and 2/75 (2.7%) women having epidural analgesia, in whom inadvertent dural puncture was subsequently confirmed, had fluid samples testing positive for glucose. Median [range] laboratory glucose readings were 2.9 [1.3–5.1] mmol/L for cerebrospinal fluid and <0.3 mmol/L in fluid that leaked from a Tuohy needle (P = 0.0001).ConclusionWhen using a loss of resistance to saline technique for epidural catheter placement, bedside glucometer testing of fluid leaking from the epidural needle may be of value in the early detection of inadvertent dural puncture.     

Epinephrine reduces the sedative side effects of epidural sufentanil for labour analgesia

PURPOSE: The use of opioids in labour analgesia has primarily been as an adjuvant to local anesthetics. For early labour, satisfactory analgesia with epidural sufentanil alone is possible. This study evaluates the impact of epinephrine on sedative side effects and analgesia related to the latter technique. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent this prospective, randomized, double-blind study evaluated 43 nulliparous subjects requesting epidural analgesia. The study site, a tertiary care obstetric unit, accommodates 3500-4500 deliveries annually. Group selection was randomized and blinded by selection of a sealed envelope containing a number which corresponded to a premixed labelled syringe of saline or epinephrine (100 microg/mL). An epidural catheter was placed in a standardized fashion. All subjects received 40 microg of sufentanil and 0.5 mL from the premixed syringe, diluted to 10 mL with NaCl. A blinded observer collected data on maternal sedation, lightheadedness, hemodynamics, oxygenation, and fetal heart rate over a one-hour period following sufentanil injection. RESULTS: The addition of epinephrine significantly (P <0.05) reduced the incidence of sedation and lightheadedness after epidural sufentanil at all data collection points, except two. Analgesic duration was also significantly prolonged by this addition (120 +/- 56 vs 84 +/- 32 min). Maternal satisfaction was high regardless of solution. CONCLUSION: Forty micrograms of epidural sufentanil produces satisfactory analgesia in early labour. The addition of epinephrine improves the side effect profile of this technique while prolonging the duration of analgesia. Epidural sufentanil requires attention to maternal monitoring of oxygenation as maternal desaturation occurred in both groups.     

Addition of dextrose 3.5% to intrathecal sufentanil for labour analgesia reduces pruritus

PURPOSE: To determine whether the addition of a low concentration (3.5%) of dextrose would minimize pruritus while maintaining the quality of analgesia. METHODS: In a double blind study 48 parturients in early labour were randomized to one of two study groups: dextrose (Dex, n = 24; 10 microg sufentanil in dextrose 3.5%), or normal saline (NS, n = 24; 10 microg sufentanil in normal saline). Parturients received the study drug as the intrathecal injection of the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique for labour analgesia. Duration and degree of analgesia were measured until epidural analgesia was initiated or delivery of the baby. The intensity and distribution (above T6, T6-L1, and below L1) of pruritus were measured at five minute intervals during first 25 min after injection. RESULTS: Quality and duration of analgesia did not differ between groups, but the overall incidence of pruritus was less in the Dex group (88% vs 42%, P = 0.001). Within each region, the incidence of pruritus was less in the Dex group. In patients who had pruritus, for the Dex group, the incidence of pruritus in the upper region (>T6) was lower than the NS group. There was no difference in the lower regions. CONCLUSION: The addition of dextrose 3.5% to intrathecal sufentanil reduced the incidence of pruritus without affecting the duration or quality of analgesia in parturients in early labour. The distribution of pruritus in the Dex group was limited to below T6 suggesting that pruritus to intrathecal sufentanil is mediated at the spinal level.     

Post dural puncture headache following combined spinal epidural or epidural anaesthesia in obstetric patients.

A retrospective review of obstetric anaesthesia charts was performed for all parturients receiving regional anaesthesia over a 22-month period. The incidence of headache, post dural puncture headache (PDPH) and various other complications of regional anaesthesia that had been prospectively assessed were noted, as was the anaesthetic technique used (epidural or combined spinal epidural (CSE)). PDPH was rare (0.44%) and occurred with similar frequency in those managed with either epidural or CSE anaesthesia or analgesia. The pencil-point spinal needle gauge (27 or 29) did not influence the incidence of PDPH. Following a CSE technique, the epidural catheter more reliably produced effective analgesia/anaesthesia as compared with a standard epidural technique (1.49% versus 3.18% incidence of replaced catheters respectively). We conclude, based on the results of this retrospective review, that CSE is acceptable with respect to the occurrence of PDPH and that it is possible it is advantageous in relation to the correct placement of the epidural catheter     

Comparison of continuous spinal and epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour

We have compared continuous spinal analgesia with continuous epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour. Twenty-six women were randomly allocated to receive either epidural 0.25% bupivacaine 5-10 ml via a 20 gauge catheter inserted through a 16 gauge Tuohy needle or intrathecal 0.25% bupivacaine 0.5-1.0 ml via a 32 gauge catheter inserted through a 24 gauge Sprotte needle. This was supplemented with fentanyl 5-10 mcg (spinal) or 1 mcg per kg (epidural) if analgesia was unsatisfactory. Outcome was measured by the success and timing of the procedure, time to analgesia, amount of drug given, visual analogue scoring of pain relief by the patient and an observer and degree of motor block. Onset time and dosage were significantly reduced in the continuous spinal group. Two catheters failed to feed in the spinal group. One catheter became displaced in each group. Pain relief was satisfactory in all patients and none had post-dural puncture headache. Continuous spinal analgesia may offer significant advantages over epidural analgesia but technical difficulties remain with the present equipment. The reasons for the withdrawal of the spinal catheters in the United States of America are discussed.     

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.     

Decrease in the incidence of post-dural puncture headache: maintaining CSF volume

The incidence of epidural needle-induced post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) in parturients following dural puncture with a large bore (18-gauge) needle has been reported to range 76-85%. We describe seven cases in which the performance of epidural anesthesia in parturients was complicated by an unintentional dural puncture with an 18-gauge epidural needle. In all seven cases, the unintentional dural puncture was followed by (i) injection of the CSF in the glass syringe back into the subarachnoid space through the epidural needle, (ii) insertion of a epidural catheter into the subarachnoid space (now referred to as an intrathecal catheter), (iii) injection of a small amount of preservative free saline (3-5 ml) into the subarachnoid space through the intrathecal catheter, (iv) administration of bolus and then continuous intrathecal labor analgesia through the intrathecal catheter and then (v) leaving the intrathecal catheter in-situ for a total of 12-20 h. PDPH occurred in only one of these cases (14%).