Souza Márcio Antonio de, Silva João Luiz Pinto e, Maia Filho Nelson Lourenço
Disciplina de Anestesiologia , Faculdade de Medicina de Jundiaí - FMJ - Jundiaí, SP, Brasil.
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009 Oct;31(10):485-91. doi: 10.1590/s0100-72032009001000003.
To compare maternal and perinatal results, after the use of continuous peridural versus combined rachidian and peridural analgesia in primiparous parturients.
Randomized clinical trial with 128 primiparous pregnant women in labor, divided into two groups: peridural analgesia (CPA) with 65 women, and combined continuous rachidian and peridural analgesia (CRPA) with 63, all of them admitted in the pre-labor period at two maternities in Jundiai, in the state of São Paulo. The variables studied were: latency of analgesia onset, pain intensity, total time until complete dilation, Apgar index at the first and fifth minutes, labor duration, degree of motor blockade, adverse effects such as vomiting, pruritus, arterial hypotension and degree of maternal fulfillment. Inclusion criteria were: primiparous, physical condition ASA 1 and 2, an only foetus, cephalic presentation, term delivery, 3 to 6 cm cervical dilation, and analgesia required by the obstetrician. Women with morbidity, membrane rupture, fetal abnormality and use of opioids up to four hours before were excluded. The Mann-Whitney test was used for the statistical analysis of non-parametric continuous variables, and Fisher's exact and Pearson's chi2 tests, for the categoric variables.
There was no difference between the groups concerning the length of cervical dilation, labor duration, maternal hemodynamic parameters, newborn vitality, analgesic complementation during labor and type of delivery. Analgesia onset was quicker in the CRPA group, and the CPA group presented less motor blockade. Differences concerning adverse effects such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus and hypotension have not been observed, but hypotension was more frequent in the CPA group (6.3 versus 3.1%).
Both techniques have proved to be safe and efficient, but CRP has provided an earlier onset, with quicker pain relief. The lesser motor blockade in the CPA group has allowed the parturients more active movements in bed and more effective collaboration during the expulsion period. Most women were pleased with the analgesia they got. The doses of local anesthetics and opioids used in both analgesic techniques and the complementary doses, equal in both groups, neither had any significant adverse effect nor affected newborn vitality.
比较初产妇使用连续硬膜外麻醉与腰麻-硬膜外联合麻醉后的母体及围产期结局。
对128例临产初产妇进行随机临床试验,分为两组:65例接受硬膜外镇痛(CPA),63例接受腰麻-硬膜外联合持续镇痛(CRPA),所有产妇均在圣保罗州容迪亚伊市的两家产科医院临产前入院。研究的变量包括:镇痛起效潜伏期、疼痛强度、宫口完全扩张所需总时间、第1分钟和第5分钟的阿氏评分、产程、运动阻滞程度、恶心、瘙痒、动脉低血压等不良反应以及产妇满意度。纳入标准为:初产妇、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况分级为1级和2级、单胎、头先露、足月分娩、宫颈扩张3至6厘米、产科医生要求进行镇痛。排除有并发症、胎膜破裂、胎儿异常以及在术前4小时内使用过阿片类药物的妇女。采用曼-惠特尼检验对非参数连续变量进行统计分析,采用费舍尔精确检验和皮尔逊卡方检验对分类变量进行分析。
两组在宫颈扩张时间、产程、母体血流动力学参数、新生儿活力、分娩期间镇痛补充情况及分娩方式方面无差异。CRPA组镇痛起效更快,CPA组运动阻滞较轻。未观察到恶心、呕吐、瘙痒和低血压等不良反应的差异,但CPA组低血压更常见(6.3%对3.1%)。
两种技术均被证明安全有效,但CRPA起效更早,能更快缓解疼痛。CPA组运动阻滞较轻,使产妇在产床上活动更自如,分娩期合作更有效。大多数妇女对所接受的镇痛效果满意。两组镇痛技术中使用的局部麻醉药和阿片类药物剂量及补充剂量相同,既无明显不良反应,也未影响新生儿活力。