FRCPC, Department of Women and Obstetric Anesthesia, IWK Health Centre, Dalhousie University, 5850/5980 University Avenue, PO Box 9700, Halifax, NS, Canada B3K 6R8.
Anesth Analg. 2013 Jan;116(1):133-44. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182713b26. Epub 2012 Dec 7.
The current standard labor epidural analgesic regimens consist of a local anesthetic in combination with an opioid delivered via continuous epidural infusion (CEI). With CEI local anesthetic, doses may be large with resulting profound motor blockade potentially affecting the incidence of instrumental deliveries. In this systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we compared the effect of intermittent epidural bolus (IEB) to standard CEI dosing with or without patient-controlled epidural analgesia on patient satisfaction, the need for manual anesthesia interventions, labor progression, and mode of delivery in healthy women receiving labor epidural analgesia.
A systematic review of RCTs that compared CEI with IEB for labor analgesia was performed. The articles were evaluated for validity, and data were extracted by the authors and summarized using odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Nine RCTs were included in this systematic review. Three hundred forty-four subjects received CEI, whereas 350 subjects received IEB labor analgesia. All 9 studies were deemed to be low risk of bias. There was no statistical difference detected between IEB and CEI in the rate of cesarean delivery (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.56-1.35), duration of labor (MD, -17 minutes; 95% CI, -42 to 7), or the need for anesthetic intervention (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.29-1.06). IEB did result in a small but statistically significant reduction in local anesthetic usage (MD, -1.2 mg bupivacaine equivalent per hour; 95% CI, -2.2 to -0.3). Maternal satisfaction score (100-mm visual analog scale) was higher with IEB (MD, 7.0 mm; 95% CI, 6.2-7.8).
IEB is an appealing concept; current evidence suggests IEB slightly reduces local anesthetic usage and improves maternal satisfaction. Given the wide CIs of the pooled results for many outcomes, definite conclusions cannot be drawn for those outcomes, but there is also a potential that IEB improves instrumental delivery rate and need of anesthesia interventions. More study is required to conceptualize the ideal IEB regimen and investigate its effect on labor analgesia and obstetric outcomes.
目前的标准分娩硬膜外镇痛方案由局部麻醉剂与持续硬膜外输注(CEI)中的阿片类药物联合组成。在 CEI 中使用局部麻醉剂时,剂量可能较大,从而导致严重的运动阻滞,这可能会影响器械分娩的发生率。在这项针对随机对照试验(RCT)的系统评价中,我们比较了间歇性硬膜外推注(IEB)与标准 CEI 剂量(有或没有患者自控硬膜外镇痛)对接受分娩硬膜外镇痛的健康女性的患者满意度、手动麻醉干预的需求、产程进展和分娩方式的影响。
对比较 CEI 与 IEB 用于分娩镇痛的 RCT 进行了系统评价。作者对文章进行了有效性评估,并通过作者提取数据并使用优势比(ORs)、均数差(MDs)和 95%置信区间(CIs)进行总结。
本系统评价纳入了 9 项 RCT。344 名受试者接受 CEI 治疗,而 350 名受试者接受 IEB 分娩镇痛。所有 9 项研究均被认为具有低偏倚风险。IEB 与 CEI 之间在剖宫产率(OR,0.87;95%CI,0.56-1.35)、产程持续时间(MD,-17 分钟;95%CI,-42 至 7)或麻醉干预的需求(OR,0.56;95%CI,0.29-1.06)方面无统计学差异。IEB 确实导致局部麻醉剂使用量略有但具有统计学意义的减少(MD,-1.2mg 布比卡因等效量/小时;95%CI,-2.2 至-0.3)。IEB 的产妇满意度评分(100mm 视觉模拟评分)更高(MD,7.0mm;95%CI,6.2-7.8)。
IEB 是一个有吸引力的概念;现有证据表明,IEB 可略微减少局部麻醉剂的使用并提高产妇的满意度。鉴于许多结局的汇总结果的置信区间较宽,因此不能对这些结局得出明确的结论,但也有可能 IEB 会提高器械分娩率和麻醉干预的需求。需要进一步研究来构思理想的 IEB 方案,并研究其对分娩镇痛和产科结局的影响。