A comparison of epidural analgesia with 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor

被引:75
作者
Meister, GC [1 ]
D'Angelo, R [1 ]
Owen, M [1 ]
Nelson, KE [1 ]
Gaver, R [1 ]
机构
[1] Wake Forest Univ, Bowman Gray Sch Med, Dept Anesthesiol, Winston Salem, NC USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00000539-200003000-00024
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
We previously found that the extent of an epidural motor block produced by 0.125% ropivacaine was clinically indistinguishable from 0.125% bupivacaine In laboring patients. By adding fentanyl to the 0.125% ropivacaine and bupivacaine solutions in an attempt to reduce hourly local anesthetic requirements, we hypothesized that differences in motor block produced by the two drugs may become apparent. Fifty laboring women were randomized to receive either 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 mu g/mL or an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with settings of: 6-mL/hr basal rate, 5-mL bolus, 10-min lockout, 30-mL/h dose limit. Analgesia, local anesthetic use, motor block, patient satisfaction, and side effects were assessed until the time of delivery. No differences in verbal pain scores, local anesthetic use, patient satisfaction, or side effects between groups were observed; however, patients administered ropivacaine/fentanyl developed significantly less motor block than patients administered bupivacaine/fentanyl. Ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 mu g/mL produces similar labor analgesia with significantly less motor block than an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanly. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the PCEA technique remains to be determined. Implications: By using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique, ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 mu g/mL produces similar analgesia with significantly less motor block than a similar concentration of bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique remains to be determined.
引用
收藏
页码:632 / 637
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
BADER AM, 1989, ANESTH ANALG, V68, P724
[2]   Continuous extradural infusion of ropivacaine 2 mg ml(-1) for pain relief during labour [J].
Benhamou, D ;
Hamza, J ;
Eledjam, JJ ;
Dailland, P ;
Palot, M ;
Seebacher, J ;
Milon, D ;
Heeroma, K .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1997, 78 (06) :748-750
[3]   Relative potencies of bupivacaine and ropivacaine for analgesia in labour [J].
Capogna, G ;
Celleno, D ;
Fusco, P ;
Lyons, G ;
Columb, M .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1999, 82 (03) :371-373
[4]   Epidural fentanyl produces labor analgesia by a spinal mechanism [J].
D'Angelo, R ;
Gerancher, JC ;
Eisenach, JC ;
Raphael, BL .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 88 (06) :1519-1523
[5]   CLINICAL EFFECTS AND MATERNAL AND FETAL PLASMA-CONCENTRATION OF EPIDURAL ROPIVACAINE VERSUS BUPIVACAINE FOR CESAREAN-SECTION [J].
DATTA, S ;
CAMANN, W ;
BADER, A ;
VANDERBURGH, L .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1995, 82 (06) :1346-1352
[6]   A double-blind comparison of 0.25 % ropivacaine and 0.25 % bupivacaine for extradural analgesia in labour [J].
Eddleston, JM ;
Holland, JJ ;
Griffin, RP ;
Corbett, A ;
Horsman, EL ;
Reynolds, F .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1996, 76 (01) :66-71
[7]   COMPARATIVE MOTOR-BLOCKING EFFECTS OF BUPIVACAINE AND ROPIVACAINE, A NEW AMINO AMIDE LOCAL-ANESTHETIC, IN THE RAT AND DOG [J].
FELDMAN, HS ;
COVINO, BG .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1988, 67 (11) :1047-1052
[8]   Comparison of 0.255% ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia for labor and vaginal delivery [J].
Gaiser, RR ;
Venkateswaren, P ;
Cheek, TG ;
Persiley, E ;
Buxbaum, J ;
Hedge, J ;
Joyce, TH ;
Gutsche, BB .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 1997, 9 (07) :564-568
[9]   Extradural pain relief in labour: Bupivacaine sparing by extradural fentanyl is dose dependent [J].
Lyons, G ;
Columb, M ;
Hawthorne, L ;
Dresner, M .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1997, 78 (05) :493-497
[10]  
LYZAK SZ, 1990, ANESTHESIOLOGY, V72, P44