Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023 May;228(5S):S1260-S1269. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.017. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
Epidural analgesia is an important means of pain control during labor throughout the world. Over its historic development, it has been implicated in several undesirable outcomes, including prolongation of labor and increased need for operative delivery. These effects have emerged in some retrospective and observational studies, but such methods of investigation are highly prone to bias and are particularly ill-suited for the study of labor analgesia. In high-quality studies, including Cochrane reviews and meta-analyses, epidural analgesia has been suggested to extend the first stage of labor by 30 minutes and the second stage by 15 minutes, when compared with alternative forms of analgesia. Although this may be a reproducible effect, it may be argued that it is clinically negligible. With respect to mode of delivery, similar high-quality studies have consistently shown no increased risk of cesarean delivery associated with epidural analgesia. Some forms of epidural analgesia were associated with higher risk of assisted vaginal delivery, but the use of newer modalities has been shown to abolish this effect. Specific advancements have centered on reducing total anesthetic consumption, given that local anesthetic-induced motor block is theorized to interfere with maternal expulsive efforts in the second stage of labor. These measures include the use of low-concentration local anesthetic solutions equivalent to ≤0.1% bupivacaine, shown in meta-analyses to lead to no higher risk of assisted vaginal delivery relative to nonepidural analgesia. Additional advancements in the maintenance of analgesia include programmed intermittent epidural bolus and patient-controlled epidural analgesia, the combination of which has been shown to reduce the risk of assisted vaginal delivery, also likely mediated by reduction in local anesthetic dose. These techniques have gained popularity in the past two decades, such that studies published since 2005 show no higher risk of assisted vaginal delivery with epidural than with opioid analgesia (as reported in a Cochrane review). Labor epidural analgesia has implications for maternal and fetal health perinatally. It is known to result in transient maternal hypotension (particularly with initiation), which may progress to the level of necessitating fluid or vasopressor therapy. This is not clearly associated with any adverse outcomes. There is also a consistently higher incidence of fever in parturients receiving neuraxial anesthesia, likely of noninfectious origin, which has similarly not been associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. Finally, neonates of parturients who receive epidural analgesia have been shown to have no worse Apgar scores and more favorable acid-base status than their counterparts. These observations should serve to reassure providers that modern labor analgesia, as currently understood, is not consistently associated with any significant adverse outcomes for the parturient or fetus. In this review, we describe variations of modern labor epidural analgesia, conduct an in-depth review of current literature on its use, and explore the most up-to-date evidence on its implications for the progression and outcomes of labor, including the pertinent maternal and fetal side effects.
硬膜外镇痛是全球范围内分娩过程中控制疼痛的重要手段。在其历史发展过程中,它与一些不良结局有关,包括产程延长和需要手术分娩。这些影响在一些回顾性和观察性研究中出现,但这种研究方法极易产生偏倚,特别不适合研究分娩镇痛。在高质量的研究中,包括 Cochrane 综述和荟萃分析,与其他镇痛形式相比,硬膜外镇痛被认为会使第一产程延长 30 分钟,第二产程延长 15 分钟。虽然这可能是一种可重复的效应,但可以认为它在临床上是微不足道的。在分娩方式方面,类似的高质量研究一致表明,硬膜外镇痛与剖宫产风险增加无关。一些形式的硬膜外镇痛与辅助阴道分娩的风险增加有关,但使用新的方法已经证明可以消除这种影响。具体的进展集中在减少总麻醉剂消耗上,因为局部麻醉剂引起的运动阻滞理论上会干扰第二产程中产妇的用力。这些措施包括使用低浓度局部麻醉剂溶液(等效于≤0.1%布比卡因),荟萃分析显示,与非硬膜外镇痛相比,这种方法不会增加辅助阴道分娩的风险。维持镇痛的其他进展包括间歇性硬膜外推注和患者自控硬膜外镇痛,联合使用这两种方法已被证明可以降低辅助阴道分娩的风险,这可能也与减少局部麻醉剂剂量有关。这些技术在过去二十年中变得流行起来,以至于自 2005 年以来发表的研究显示,硬膜外分娩镇痛与阿片类药物镇痛相比,辅助阴道分娩的风险没有增加(Cochrane 综述报道)。分娩硬膜外镇痛对母婴围产期健康有影响。它会导致产妇短暂性低血压(特别是在开始时),可能进展到需要补液或血管加压药物治疗的程度。但这与任何不良结局都没有明确的关联。接受椎管内麻醉的产妇发热的发生率也一直较高,可能是非感染性的,也与新生儿不良结局无关。最后,接受硬膜外镇痛的产妇的新生儿 Apgar 评分和酸碱状态比对照组更有利。这些观察结果应该让提供者放心,即目前所理解的现代分娩镇痛,并不总是与产妇或胎儿的任何重大不良结局有关。在这篇综述中,我们描述了现代分娩硬膜外镇痛的变化,对其使用的当前文献进行了深入的回顾,并探讨了其对分娩进展和结局的最新证据,包括相关的母婴副作用。