Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Publication year range
1.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 24(1): 212, 2024 Jun 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38918712

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: 3% chloroprocaine (CP) has been reported as the common local anesthetic used in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. However, 0.75% ropivacaine is considered a promising and effective alternative. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness and safety of 0.75% ropivacaine with 3% chloroprocaine for extended epidural anesthesia in pregnant women. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled, single-center study from November 1, 2022, to April 30, 2023. We selected forty-five pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period and randomized them to receive either 0.75% ropivacaine or 3% chloroprocaine in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the time to loss of cold sensation at the T4 level. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the two groups in the time to achieve loss of cold sensation (303, 95%CI 255 to 402 S vs. 372, 95%CI 297 to 630 S, p = 0.024). There was no significant difference the degree of motor block (p = 0.185) at the Th4 level. Fewer pregnant women required additional local anesthetics in the ropivacaine group compared to the chloroprocaine group (4.5% VS. 34.8%, p = 0.011). The ropivacaine group had lower intraoperative VAS scores (p = 0.023) and higher patient satisfaction scores (p = 0.040) than the chloroprocaine group. The incidence of intraoperative complications was similar between the two groups, and no serious complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that 0.75% ropivacaine was associated with less intraoperative pain treatment, higher patient satisfaction and reduced the onset time compared to 3% chloroprocaine in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. Therefore, 0.75% ropivacaine may be a suitable drug in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL: The registration number: ChiCTR2200065201; http://www.chictr.org.cn , Principal investigator: MEN, Date of registration: 31/10/2022.


Asunto(s)
Analgesia Obstétrica , Anestésicos Locales , Cesárea , Procaína , Ropivacaína , Humanos , Femenino , Ropivacaína/administración & dosificación , Embarazo , Método Doble Ciego , Cesárea/métodos , Anestésicos Locales/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Analgesia Obstétrica/métodos , Procaína/análogos & derivados , Procaína/administración & dosificación
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(4): e239321, 2023 04 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37083664

RESUMEN

Importance: Epidural anesthesia is a primary choice for cesarean delivery, but supplemental analgesics are often required to relieve pain during uterine traction. Objective: To investigate the sedative and analgesic effects of intravenous esketamine administered before childbirth via cesarean delivery with the patient under epidural anesthesia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, double-blind randomized clinical trial assessed 903 women 18 years or older who had full-term single pregnancy and were scheduled for elective cesarean delivery with epidural anesthesia in 5 medical centers in China from September 18, 2021, to September 20, 2022. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive intravenous injection of 0.25 mg/kg of esketamine or placebo before incision. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes included scores on the numeric rating scale of pain (an 11-point scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain; a difference of ≥1.65 points was clinically meaningful) and Ramsay Sedation Scale (a 6-point scale, with 1 indicating restlessness and 6 indicating deep sleep without response; a difference of ≥2 points was clinically meaningful) immediately after fetal delivery. Secondary outcomes included neonatal Apgar score assessed at 1 and 5 minutes after birth. Results: A total of 600 women (mean [SD] age, 30.7 [4.3] years) were enrolled and randomized; all were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Immediately after fetal delivery, the score on the numeric rating scale of pain was lower with esketamine (median [IQR], 0 [0-1]) than with placebo (median [IQR], 0 [0-2]; median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .001), but the difference was not clinically important. The Ramsay Sedation Scale scores were higher (sedation deeper) with esketamine (median [IQR], 4 [3-4]) than with placebo (median [IQR], 2 [2-2]; median difference, 2; 95% CI, 2-2; P < .001). The neonatal Apgar scores did not differ between the 2 groups at 1 minute (median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .98) and at 5 minutes (median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .27). Transient neurologic or mental symptoms were more common in patients given esketamine (97.7% [293 of 300]) than in those given placebo (4.7% [14 of 300]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: For women undergoing cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia, a subanesthetic dose of esketamine administered before incision produced transient analgesia and sedation but did not induce significant neonatal depression. Mental symptoms and nystagmus were common but transient. Indications and the optimal dose of esketamine in this patient population need further clarification, but study should be limited to those who require supplemental analgesia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04548973.


Asunto(s)
Analgesia Epidural , Cesárea , Embarazo , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Femenino , Adulto , Cesárea/efectos adversos , Manejo del Dolor , Dolor
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda