Department of Anesthesia, Akershus University hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2020 Nov;64(10):1505-1512. doi: 10.1111/aas.13689. Epub 2020 Sep 7.
Traditionally, epidural analgesia has been maintained using a continuous infusion (CEI) with the addition of patient-controlled boluses (PCEA). In recent years, programmed intermittent boluses (PIEB) has emerged as an alternative showing better efficacy in randomized studies. In this study, the aim was to test PIEB + PCEA vs CEI + PCEA using an epidural solution containing adrenaline.
In total, 150 nulliparous and multiparous laboring women were randomized to maintain epidural analgesia with either PIEB + PCEA (5 ml bolus every hour, 5 ml PCEA bolus lockout 20 minutes) or CEI + PCEA (5 ml/h, 5 ml PCEA bolus, lockout 20 minutes) using a solution of bupivacaine 1mg/ml, fentanyl 2 mcg/ml and adrenaline 2 mcg/ml. The primary outcome was total hourly consumption of the epidural solution. Secondary outcomes included hourly pain scores, motor block at 60 minutes and 10 cm cervical dilation, maternal satisfaction, and the need for anesthetist intervention and time to this intervention.
We found no differences in hourly drug consumption between the groups (mean 9.0 ml/h (SD 3.7) (CEI group) vs. 8.1 ml/h (SD 2.0) (PIEB group), P = .08). We found a significant difference in number of successfully administered PCEA boluses (mean no. 3.9 (SD 4.1) (CEI group) vs. 1.9 (SD 2.0) (PIEB group), P < .001). We found no significant differences in pain score, motor block, maternal satisfaction and the need for anesthetist intervention.
In this study, we found no clinically relevant differences using PIEB + PCEA compared to CEI + PCEA when using an epidural solution containing adrenaline.
For labor epidural analgesia infusions, to optimize the analgesic effect, additional programmed intermittent boluses can be used as an alternative to patient-controlled boluses only. In this clinical trial, no differences in drug consumption or analgesic effect was observed when comparing these two different epidural bolus controls programs.
传统上,硬膜外镇痛是通过持续输注(CEI)加患者自控推注(PCEA)来维持的。近年来,程序性间歇推注(PIEB)作为一种替代方法在随机研究中显示出更好的疗效。本研究旨在测试含有肾上腺素的硬膜外溶液中使用 PIEB+PCEA 与 CEI+PCEA 的效果。
共有 150 名初产妇和经产妇被随机分为两组,分别采用 PIEB+PCEA(每小时 5ml 推注,20 分钟 5ml PCEA 推注锁定)或 CEI+PCEA(5ml/h,5ml PCEA 推注,锁定 20 分钟)维持硬膜外镇痛,使用布比卡因 1mg/ml、芬太尼 2 mcg/ml 和肾上腺素 2 mcg/ml 的混合溶液。主要结局是硬膜外溶液的总小时消耗量。次要结局包括每小时疼痛评分、60 分钟和 10cm 宫颈扩张时的运动阻滞、产妇满意度以及需要麻醉师干预和干预所需的时间。
我们发现两组之间的每小时药物消耗没有差异(CEI 组为 9.0ml/h(SD 3.7),PIEB 组为 8.1ml/h(SD 2.0),P=0.08)。我们发现成功给予 PCEA 推注的次数有显著差异(CEI 组为 3.9 次(SD 4.1),PIEB 组为 1.9 次(SD 2.0),P<0.001)。我们发现疼痛评分、运动阻滞、产妇满意度和需要麻醉师干预方面没有显著差异。
在本研究中,我们发现当使用含有肾上腺素的硬膜外溶液时,与 CEI+PCEA 相比,使用 PIEB+PCEA 并没有临床相关的差异。
对于分娩时的硬膜外镇痛输注,为了优化镇痛效果,可以使用附加的程序性间歇推注作为患者自控推注的替代方案。在这项临床试验中,当比较这两种不同的硬膜外推注控制方案时,没有观察到药物消耗或镇痛效果的差异。