Analgesic efficacy of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia versus combined spinal-epidural technique in multiparous women during labour.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the analgesic profile of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia (RPCA) and combined spinal-epidural analgesia technique (CSEA) in multiparous women during the entire labour. We hypothesized that CSEA would provide a better and more sustained pain reduction than RPCA.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective observational trial under ID NCT02963337 at a university hospital in Slovenia 2017-2018. Analgesic efficacy, satisfaction with pain-relief, adverse effects, labour progress, and outcomes between RPCA (80) and CSEA (81) were compared.

RESULTS

CSEA provided significantly lower pain scores during the entire labour. Compared to baseline, significant pain reduction was recorded in both groups after 15 min. No difference was recorded compared to baseline with RPCA and CSEA after 45 and 90 mins, respectively. CSEA provided higher satisfaction than RPCA (5 [5-5] vs 5 [4-5], p < 0.0001). More patients with CSEA opted for the same technique for the next labour [CSEA; 77 (95%) vs RPCA; 65 (81%), p = 0.003]. No crossovers were observed. RPCA was associated with desaturation (34%), bradypnea (21%) and apnoea (25%), which were transitional and easily managed. None had severe sedation. No differences were recorded in labour progress and outcomes. Apgar scores were reassuring in all neonates (> 8). None had umbilical artery pH < 7.0.

CONCLUSIONS

In multiparas, CSEA provided superior analgesia and satisfaction than RPCA. Nevertheless, RPCA provided a satisfactory experience, suggesting it could be used when neuraxial analgesia is not available, preferred, or contraindicated. In that case, constant presence of midwife is mandatory for management of clinically significant hypoventilation.