Riazanova Oksana V, Alexandrovich Yuri S, Guseva Yana V, Ioscovich Alexander M
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Saint-Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Department of Anaesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Pain Treatment, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.
Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care. 2019 Apr;26(1):25-30. doi: 10.2478/rjaic-2019-0004.
Two methods of local anaesthetic administration into the epidural space in natural delivery pain management are compared in the article. Methods compared are programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) and continuous epidural infusion (CEI). Patient-controlled epidural analgesia was provided simultaneously in all cases.
84 primipara with average age 30.7 (27.5-34) years, and gestational age 39.1 (38.5-40) weeks planned to natural delivery were examined. PIEB and patient controlled epidural analgesia was used in the first group. Patient controlled epidural analgesia and continuous epidural infusion (CEI) of local anaesthetic was used in the second group. Ropivacaine hydrochloride 0.08% without any adjuvants was utilized as local anaesthetic. Pain assessment was conducted using VAS while motor block was assessed using the Bromage scale.
Labor progression dynamics and condition of newborns were equally independent to the method of analgesia. However, analgesic endpoint was better and more long-lasting while using PIEB with patient controlled epidural analgesia. Moreover, a lesser amount of local anaesthetic was consumed. In the group with programmed bolus, the total volume of local anaesthetic was 59.9 (45-66) ml in comparison with 69.5 (44-92) ml in the continuous infusion group (p = 0.033). The time to first bolus requested by the puerpera was significantly longer in the programmed bolus group - 89.2 (57-108) min compared to 43.2 (35-65) minutes in the continuous infusion group (p = 0.021).
Administration of low-concentrated ropivacaine solution 0.08% with no opioids using PIEB provides better and more prolonged analgesia with less local anaesthetic consumption and without any additional maternal and newborn side effects in comparison with continuous infusion.
本文比较了自然分娩疼痛管理中两种将局部麻醉药注入硬膜外腔的方法。所比较的方法为程序化间歇性硬膜外推注(PIEB)和持续硬膜外输注(CEI)。所有病例均同时提供患者自控硬膜外镇痛。
对84例平均年龄30.7(27.5 - 34)岁、孕周39.1(38.5 - 40)周且计划自然分娩的初产妇进行检查。第一组使用PIEB和患者自控硬膜外镇痛。第二组使用患者自控硬膜外镇痛和局部麻醉药的持续硬膜外输注(CEI)。使用不含任何佐剂的0.08%盐酸罗哌卡因作为局部麻醉药。使用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)进行疼痛评估,同时使用布罗玛杰分级法评估运动阻滞。
产程进展动态和新生儿状况与镇痛方法同样无关,但在使用PIEB联合患者自控硬膜外镇痛时,镇痛终点更好且更持久。此外,局部麻醉药的消耗量更少。在程序化推注组,局部麻醉药的总量为59.9(45 - 66)ml,而持续输注组为69.5(44 - 92)ml(p = 0.033)。产妇首次请求推注的时间在程序化推注组显著更长——89.2(57 - 108)分钟,而持续输注组为43.2(35 - 65)分钟(p = 0.021)。
与持续输注相比,使用PIEB给予0.08%低浓度无阿片类药物的罗哌卡因溶液可提供更好、更持久的镇痛效果,局部麻醉药消耗量更少,且无任何额外的母婴副作用。