Ross Vernon H, Pan Peter H, Owen Medge D, Seid Melvin H, Harris Lynne, Clyne Brittany, Voltaire Misa, Eisenach James C
Departments of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, North Carolina 27157, USA.
Anesth Analg. 2009 Aug;109(2):524-31. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31819518e4. Epub 2009 Apr 17.
Intrathecal neostigmine not only produces analgesia but also severe nausea. In contrast, epidural neostigmine enhances opioid and local anesthetic analgesia without causing nausea. Previous studies examined only single epidural neostigmine bolus administration and did not assess the efficacy of continuous epidural infusion or several aspects of maternal and fetal safety. We therefore tested the hypothesis that epidural neostigmine in combination with bupivacaine by continuous infusion during labor would reduce the amount of bupivacaine required.
Twelve healthy women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery were assigned to receive epidural neostigmine, 40 microg (first six subjects) or 80 microg (second six subjects) as a single bolus, with fetal heart rate (FHR) and uterine contractions monitored for 20 min. In a subsequent experiment, 40 healthy laboring women were randomized to receive bupivacaine 1.25 mg/mL alone or with neostigmine 4 microg/mL by patient-controlled epidural analgesia. The primary outcome measure was hourly bupivacaine use.
Epidural neostigmine bolus did not alter baseline FHR, induce contractions, or produce nausea. Epidural neostigmine infusion reduced bupivacaine requirement by 19% in all patients and 25% in those with >4 h of treatment (P < 0.05 for both) but might have contributed to the incidence of mild sedation. Mode of delivery, incidence of maternal nausea, and FHR abnormality were similar between groups.
These data show that adding epidural neostigmine 4 microg/mL reduces the hourly bupivacaine requirement by 19%-25% with patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor. Administered as a bolus and by continuous infusion at the studied doses, epidural neostigmine does not cause nausea and does not induce uterine contractions or FHR abnormalities, but mild sedation can occur.
鞘内注射新斯的明不仅能产生镇痛作用,还会引起严重恶心。相比之下,硬膜外注射新斯的明可增强阿片类药物和局部麻醉药的镇痛效果,且不会引起恶心。以往研究仅考察了单次硬膜外注射新斯的明推注,未评估持续硬膜外输注的疗效或母婴安全的多个方面。因此,我们检验了这样一个假设:分娩期间持续输注硬膜外新斯的明联合布比卡因可减少所需布比卡因的用量。
12名计划择期剖宫产的健康女性被分配接受硬膜外注射新斯的明,单次推注40微克(前6名受试者)或80微克(后6名受试者),同时监测20分钟的胎儿心率(FHR)和子宫收缩情况。在随后的实验中,40名正在分娩的健康女性被随机分为两组,分别接受单独的1.25毫克/毫升布比卡因或通过患者自控硬膜外镇痛接受含4微克/毫升新斯的明的布比卡因。主要观察指标是每小时布比卡因的用量。
硬膜外注射新斯的明推注未改变基线FHR,未诱发宫缩或引起恶心。硬膜外输注新斯的明使所有患者的布比卡因需求量减少了19%,治疗时间>4小时的患者减少了25%(两者P均<0.05),但可能导致了轻度镇静的发生率。两组之间的分娩方式、产妇恶心发生率和FHR异常情况相似。
这些数据表明,在分娩期间通过患者自控硬膜外镇痛添加4微克/毫升硬膜外新斯的明可使每小时布比卡因需求量减少19% - 25%。以推注和研究剂量持续输注时,硬膜外新斯的明不会引起恶心,不会诱发子宫收缩或FHR异常,但可能会出现轻度镇静。