Epidural analgesia during labor and its optimal initiation time-points: A real-world study on 400 Chinese nulliparas.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Abstract
Recent research has suggested that 6?cm of cervical dilation should be the threshold for the active labor phase, and it has confirmed that epidural analgesia (EA) is a safe method of pain relief during labor. However, the evidence provided for these findings comes mainly from randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), which suffer from the limitation of real-world generalizability.To test the generalizability of the conclusions from these previous RCTs, we conducted a prospective cohort, real-world study (RWS) on 400 Chinese term nulliparas. A total of 200 of the participants (the EA group) received EA upon request. The participants in the EA group were further subdivided as follows according to their cervical dilation when the EA administration was initiated (CDE): [EA1 group (CDE?
SUBMITTER: Zha Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7939169 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Epidural analgesia during labor and its optimal initiation time-points: A real-world study on 400 Chinese nulliparas.
Zha Ying Y Gong Xun X Yang Chengwu C Deng Dongrui D Feng Ling L Luo Ailin A Wan Li L Qiao Fuyuan F Zeng Wanjiang W Chen Suhua S Wu Yuanyuan Y Han Dongji D Liu Haiyi H
Medicine 20210301 9
<h4>Abstract</h4>Recent research has suggested that 6 cm of cervical dilation should be the threshold for the active labor phase, and it has confirmed that epidural analgesia (EA) is a safe method of pain relief during labor. However, the evidence provided for these findings comes mainly from randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), which suffer from the limitation of real-world generalizability.To test the generalizability of the conclusions from these previous RCTs, we conducted a prospec ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background:The rationale for injection of epidural medications through the needle is to promote sooner onset of pain relief relative to dosing through the epidural catheter given that needle injection can be performed immediately after successful location of the epidural space. Some evidence indicates that dosing medications through the epidural needle results in faster onset and improved quality of epidural anesthesia compared to dosing through the catheter, though these dosing techniques have not been compared in laboring women. This investigation was performed to determine whether dosing medication through the epidural needle improves the quality of analgesia, level of sensory blockade, or onset of pain relief measured from the time of epidural medication injection. Methods:In this double-blinded prospective investigation, healthy term laboring women (n=60) received labor epidural placement upon request. Epidural analgesia was initiated according to the assigned randomization group: 10 mL loading dose (0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 µg/mL) through either the epidural needle or the catheter, given in 5 mL increments spaced 2 minutes apart. Verbal rating scale (VRS) pain scores (0-10) and pinprick sensory levels were documented to determine the rates of analgesic and sensory blockade onset. Results:No significant differences were observed in onset of analgesia or sensory blockade from the time of injection between study groups. The estimated difference in the rate of pain relief (VRS/minute) was 0.04 (95% CI: -0.01 to 0.11; p=0.109), and the estimated difference in onset of sensory blockade (sensory level/minute) was 0.63 (95% CI: -0.02 to 0.15; p=0.166). The time to VRS ?3 and level of sensory block 20 minutes after dosing were also similar between groups. No differences in patient satisfaction, or maternal or fetal complications were observed. Conclusion:This investigation observed that epidural needle and catheter injection of medications result in similar onset of analgesia and sensory blockade, quality of labor analgesia, patient satisfaction, and complication rates.
| S-EPMC5732563 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe epidural pressure is pulsatile and synchronized with arterial pulsations. Monitoring the epidural waveform has been suggested as a technique to reliably confirm the appropriate localization of the epidural catheter.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Computer Controlled Drug Delivery System with continuous pressure and waveform sensing technology (CCDDS) (CompuFlo® CathCheck™) as an instrument to assess the correct placement of the catheter in the epidural space in parturients who have received combined spinal-epidural technique (CSE) for labor analgesia.MethodsWe enrolled 40 consecutive healthy patients undergoing CSE labor analgesia with successful analgesia. All the cases in which pulsatile waveforms in synchrony with heart rate were detected were considered to be true positives; all the cases in which there was the absence of pulsatile waves were followed up. If these patients had to eventually relocate or manipulate the epidural catheter, they were considered to be true negative. If the absence of pulse waves was observed in the presence of successful analgesia during labor, the patients were considered to be false negatives.ResultsPulsatile waveforms synchronous with heart rate were observed in 33 cases associated with adequate analgesia. In 5 cases, the pulsatile waveforms were absent due to unilateral analgesia or catheter occlusion (true negatives). In 2 cases, the patients had effective analgesia but we were not able to observe a distinct pulsatile waveform. The pressure waveform analysis through the epidural catheter had a sensitivity of 95%, a positive predictive value of 100%, a specificity of 100% and a negative predictive value of 60%.ConclusionPulsatile pressure waveform recording with CCDDS through the epidural catheter resulted in high sensitivity and positive predictive value which can help the proper placement of the epidural catheter.
| S-EPMC8216732 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:This report aimed to describe the characteristics and impact of subdural hematoma (SDH) after labor epidural analgesia. CASE REPORTS:Eleven obstetric patients had SDHs associated with the use of labor epidural analgesia over 7 years at a tertiary care hospital. Ten of 11 patients had signs consistent with postdural puncture headache before the diagnosis of SDH. Five patients (45%) had a recognized unintentional dural puncture, 1 (9%) had a combined spinal-epidural with a 24-gauge needle, and 5 (45%) had no recognized dural puncture. For 10 of the 11 cases, SDH was diagnosed at a mean of 4.1 days (range, 1-7 days) after performance of labor epidural analgesia; one case was diagnosed at 25 days. Ten (91%) of 11 cases had a second hospital stay for a mean of 2.8 days (range, 2-4 days) for observation, without further requirement for neurosurgical intervention. One case (9%) had decompressive hemicraniectomy after becoming unresponsive. The observed rate of labor epidural analgesia-associated SDH was 0.026% (11 in 42,969, approximately 1:3900), and the rate of SDH was 1.1% (5 in 437, approximately 1:87) if a recognized dural puncture occurred during epidural catheter placement. CONCLUSIONS:Subdural hematoma after labor epidural anesthesia is rare but potentially more common than historically estimated. Cases of postdural puncture headache after labor epidural anesthesia should be monitored closely for severe neurologic signs and symptoms that could herald SDH.
| S-EPMC4993647 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the development of medical equipment and techniques in labor anesthesia, it is a major issue to investigate the risks and treatment effects among techniques such as continuous epidural infusion (CEI) and intermittent epidural bolus (IEB). However, there is a controversial result regarding two techniques. This study was conducted through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for labor analgesia between the CEI and IEB techniques. The pooled results were presented as weighted mean differences (WMDs) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and odds ratios (ORs) together with 95% CIs, respectively. Eleven RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Four hundred sixty-five parturients accepted CEI, whereas 473 parturients accepted IEB labor analgesia. Elven identified low- risk bias studies were recruited for meta-analysis. The results presented no statistical difference in cesarean delivery rate between IEB and CEI (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.37) and duration of second stage of labor (WMD, -3.82 min; 95% CI, -8.28 to 0.64). IEB had statistically significant lessened risk of instrumental delivery (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.90) and for the use in local anesthetic (WMD, -1.71 mg bupivacaine equivalents per hour; 95% CI, -1.88 and -1.55). Accepted IEB had a higher score of maternal satisfaction (WMD, -6.95 mm; 95% CI, -7.77 to -6.13). Based on evidence, IEB showed a greater benefit for slightly reducing the use in local anesthetic, reduced risk of instrumental delivery, and improved maternal satisfaction for the requirement of labor epidural analgesia for healthy women. In the future, more studies need to be conducted to practice the IEB regimen and explore its influence on labor analgesia.
| S-EPMC7579642 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsDural puncture epidural (DPE) has been shown to improve labor analgesia over epidural (EPL), with fewer side effects than a combined spinal-epidural (CSE). However, there is some debate regarding the superiority of DPE over EPL and CSE. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effects of EPL, DPE, and CSE without intrathecal opioids on the epidural local anesthetic (LA) consumption and occurrence of side effects in early labor.Material and methodsWe randomly assigned parturient to one of the 3 groups; EPL, DPE, or CSE. EPL and DPE groups received a 10 mL loading dose of 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 μg/mL. CSE group received intrathecal 2.5 mg bupivacaine (without opioids). Labor analgesia was maintained in all patients via patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). The primary outcome was the mean hourly consumption of epidural LA.ResultsThe mean hourly consumption of epidural LA anesthetic was significantly lower in CSE (9.55 mL), compared with the EPL (11 mL), and DPE (10.5 mL), P < 0.01; but no significant difference was seen between EPL and DPE. Compared with EPL and DPE, CSE achieved faster time to complete analgesia defined as a numeric rating pain scale (NRPS) ≤1 and sensory block, lower NRPS in the first hour and higher frequencies of complete analgesia. There were no differences between groups in terms of physician top-up boluses, the occurrence of side-effects, mode of delivery, Apgar scores, and maternal satisfaction.ConclusionCompared with EPL and DPE, CSE without intrathecal opioids, had a less epidural LA consumption, faster onset of analgesia, with no difference in the incidence of side effects.Trial registrationThis study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03980951).
| S-EPMC8289667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIf conversion of labor epidural analgesia to cesarean delivery anesthesia fails, the anesthesiologist can be confronted with a challenging clinical dilemma. Optimal management of a failed epidural top up continues to be debated in the absence of best practice guidelines.MethodAll members of the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association in the United Kingdom were emailed an online survey in May 2017. It obtained information on factors influencing the decision to utilize an existing labor epidural for cesarean section and, if epidural top up resulted in no objective sensory block, bilateral T10 sensory block, or unilateral T6 sensory block, factors influencing the management and selection of anesthetic technique. Differences in management options between respondents were compared using the chi-squared test.ResultsWe received 710 survey questionnaires with an overall response rate of 41%. Most respondents (89%) would consider topping up an existing labor epidural for a category-one cesarean section. In evaluating whether or not to top up an existing labor epidural, the factors influencing decision-making were how effective the epidural had been for labor pain (99%), category of cesarean section (73%), and dermatomal level of blockade (61%). In the setting of a failed epidural top up, the most influential factors determining further anesthetic management were the category of cesarean section (92%), dermatomal level of blockade (78%), and the assessment of maternal airway. Spinal anesthesia was commonly preferred if an epidural top up resulted in no objective sensory block (74%), bilateral T10 sensory block (57%), or unilateral T6 sensory block (45%). If the sensory block level was higher or unilateral, then a lower dose of intrathecal local anesthetic was selected and alternative options such as combined-spinal epidural and general anesthesia were increasingly favored.DiscussionOur survey revealed variations in the clinical management of a failed epidural top up for cesarean delivery, suggesting guidelines to aid decision-making are needed.
| S-EPMC6589285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is controversy regarding the benefits and risks of combined spinal-epidural compared with epidural analgesia (CSE, EPID) for labor analgesia. We hypothesized that CSE would result in fewer patient requests for top-up doses compared to EPID.One-hundred ASA physical status I or II parous women at term in early labor (<5 cm cervical dilation) requesting analgesia were randomized in double-blind fashion to the EPID group (epidural bupivacaine 2.5 mg/mL, 3 mL, followed by bupivacaine 1.25 mg/mL, 10 mL with fentanyl 50 microg) or the CSE group (intrathecal bupivacaine 2.5 mg with fentanyl 25 microg). Both groups received identical infusions of bupivacaine 0.625 mg/mL with fentanyl 2 microg/mL at 12 mL/h. The primary outcome variable was the number of top-up doses requested to treat breakthrough pain.There was no significant difference between the two groups in the percentage of patients requesting top-up doses (44% CSE vs 51% EPID; 95% confidence interval of the difference -28% to +14%) nor in the need for multiple top-up doses (14% CSE vs 15% EPID). Visual analog scale scores were lower in the CSE group compared to the EPID group at 10 min after initiation of analgesia [median 0 cm (0, 0) vs 4 cm (1, 6) respectively, P < 0.001] and at 30 min [0 cm (0, 0) vs 0 cm (0, 1), respectively, P = 0.03].We did not find a difference in the need for top-up doses in parous patients; however, CSE provided better analgesia in the first 30 min compared to EPID.
| S-EPMC2670780 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are inconsistent results regarding the efficacy and safety of intermittent epidural bolus (IPB) versus continuous epidural infusions (CPI) for labor analgesia. This study used a meta-analytic approach to assess the safety and treatment efficacy of IPB versus CPI for labor analgesia based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Four electronic databases were used to identify eligible RCTs. Pooled effect estimates at 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Twenty-two RCTs with 2,573 parturients were selected for final analysis. The findings revealed no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the incidences of cesarean and instrumental delivery. IPB was shown to be associated with shorter total duration of labor [weighted mean difference (WMD): -21.46; 95% CI: -25.07 to -17.85; P < 0.001], duration of the first of stage of labor (WMD: -13.41; 95% CI: -21.01 to -5.81; P = 0.001), and duration of the second stage of labor (WMD: -4.98; 95% CI: -9.32 to -0.63; P = 0.025). Furthermore, IPB significantly reduced the incidences of required anesthetic interventions compared with CPI [relative risk (RR): 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95; P = 0.030], whereas there was no significant difference between IPB and CPI for the time required in the first anesthetic intervention (WMD: 7.73; 95% CI: -33.68-49.15; P = 0.714). The local anesthetic IPB (bupivacaine equivalents) was associated with lower milligrams per hour of local anesthetic (WMD: -0.89; 95% CI: -1.41 to -0.36; P = 0.001) and better maternal satisfaction (WMD: 8.76; 95% CI: 4.18-13.35; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the risk of adverse events. This study found that parturients with IPB have short total duration of labor and duration of the first and second stage of labor, reduced requirements for additional anesthetic interventions, and improved maternal satisfaction.
| S-EPMC7292420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Epidural analgesia is effective in relieving pain during labor. However, concerns as to compromised labor progress and outcomes arise. This study aimed to assess the effect of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with ropivacaine on uterine electromyography (EMG) activities and outcomes in labor. A total of 213 pregnant women were divided into three groups: the PCEA with ropivacaine group (n = 78), the PCEA with levobupivacaine group (n = 66), and a control group that did not receive PCEA (n = 69). Uterine EMG activities were recorded during the first stage of labor. Maternal and fetal outcomes also were assessed. The primary outcomes of this study were EMG activities. No significant differences were observed in patient demographics or neonatal weight among the three groups. Compared to the PCEA with levobupivacaine group, the control and PCEA with ropivacaine groups had lower rates of oxytocin administration (P < 0.05) and shorter durations of the first stage of labor (P < 0.05). For the EMG activities, the PCEA with ropivacaine group showed a higher power (P < 0.01) and higher peak frequency (P < 0.05) than the PCEA with levobupivacaine group. With ropivacaine, the EMG activities remained stable 30-120?min. Compared with levobupivacaine, the use of ropivacaine in PCEA has no suppressive effect on uterine EMG activities during the first stage of labor. In addition, ropivacaine leads to labor progress and delivery outcomes similar to those in the control group, as well as similar and favorable analgesic satisfaction with the use of levobupivacaine.
| S-EPMC6247703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Epidural analgesia provides effective pain relief during labor. However, there is limited information on the factors associated with pregnant women's preferences for labor epidural analgesia (LEA) prior to labor onset. We performed a secondary analysis of a clinical trial to identify demographic characteristics, pain and psychological vulnerability factors associated with preferences for LEA. Pregnant women at ≥ 36 weeks' gestation prior to labor and delivery were recruited and given questionnaires on their LEA preferences, psychological and pain vulnerabilities. The primary outcome was the association between pre-delivery Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) with cut-off ≥ 10 and LEA preference. Of the 250 women recruited, 51.6% (n = 129) indicated "yes to LEA". Amongst those considering LEA as an option to reduce labor pain, women who preferred to use LEA (n = 129) indicated favorable or neutral opinion. Additionally, 68% (n = 82) from those "no to LEA" or "not sure about LEA" still gave either favorable or neutral opinion for LEA (p < 0.0001). The multivariate logistic regression analysis found that EPDS ≥ 10 (p < 0.01), occupation (p = 0.03), ethnicity (p < 0.01), state anxiety (p = 0.02), mode of current pregnancy (unplanned; planned, assisted; planned, natural; p = 0.03) and premenstrual anger/irritability before current pregnancy (p = 0.02) were associated with LEA preference. The findings may help to define the population that may require further education on considering LEA and allow early identification on different LEA preferences to provide patient centric care prior to labor and delivery.
| S-EPMC9242983 | biostudies-literature