RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The dural puncture epidural technique has been shown in some studies to improve the onset and quality of the initiation of labor analgesia compared with the standard epidural technique. However, few studies have investigated whether this technique confers advantages during the maintenance of analgesia. This randomized double-blinded controlled study compared dural puncture epidural analgesia with standard epidural analgesia when analgesia was maintained using programmed intermittent epidural boluses. METHODS: 400 parturients requesting epidural labor analgesia were randomized to have analgesia initiated with a test dose of 3 mL lidocaine 1.5% with epinephrine 15 µg, followed by 12 mL ropivacaine 0.15% mixed with sufentanil 0.5 µg/mL using the dural puncture epidural or the standard epidural technique. After confirming satisfactory analgesia, analgesia was maintained with ropivacaine 0.1% and sufentanil 0.5 µg/mL via programmed intermittent epidural boluses (fixed volume 8 mL, intervals 40 min). We compared local anesthetic consumption, pain scores, obstetric and neonatal outcomes and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 339 patients completed the study and had data analyzed. There were no differences between the dural puncture epidural and standard epidural groups in ropivacaine consumption (mean difference -0.724 mg, 95% CI of difference -1.450 to 0.001 mg, p=0.051), pain scores, time to first programmed intermittent epidural bolus, the number of programmed intermittent epidural boluses, the number of manual epidural boluses, obstetric outcome or neonatal outcome. Patient satisfaction scores were statistically higher in the dural puncture epidural group but the absolute difference in scores was small. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that when labor analgesia is maintained using the programmed intermittent epidural bolus method, there is no significant advantage to initiating analgesia using the dural puncture epidural compared with the standard epidural technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2200062349.
RESUMEN
Background: The infusion of phenylephrine to prevent spinal-induced hypotension (SIH) in cesarean delivery may decrease the rostral spread of a spinal local anesthetic. We hypothesized that infusion of norepinephrine may decrease the rostral spread of spinal anesthesia, similar to that caused by phenylephrine. The aim of this study was to compare the block height of spinal anesthesia in the presence or absence of norepinephrine infusion administered to prevent SIH during cesarean delivery. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled and allocated into groups receiving a norepinephrine infusion (group N) or saline infusion (group C). After intrathecal injection of hyperbaric bupivacaine 10 mg, the block height for cold and pinprick sensation was checked 10 and 20 min after the injection. The demographic characteristics, spinal anesthesia, side effects, and neonatal outcomes were also recorded. Results: The block height for cold and pinprick sensation was similar between the two groups, although the incidence of hypotension was significantly lower (p < 0.00) in group N than in group C. Systolic blood pressure was also more stable in group N than in group C, with the incidence of interventions being significantly lower in group N. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two groups. Conclusion: Evidence from this study suggested that prophylactic norepinephrine infusion does not reduce the rostral spread of spinal anesthesia in pregnancy. We suggest that it is not necessary to increase the dose of an intrathecal local anesthetic for cesarean delivery when prophylactic norepinephrine is administered. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/bin/project/edit?pid=152899, identifier [ChiCTR2200057439].
