The effect of low concentrations versus high concentrations of local anesthetics for labour analgesia on obstetric and anesthetic outcomes: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Introduction The influence that different concentrations of labour epidural local anesthetic have on assisted vaginal delivery (AVD) and many obstetric outcomes and side effects is uncertain. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether local anesthetics utilized at low concentrations (LCs) during labour are associated with a decreased incidence of AVD when compared with high concentrations (HCs). Methods We searched PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials of labouring patients that compared LCs (defined as B 0.1% epidural bupivacaine or B 0.17% ropivacaine) of epidural local anesthetic with HCs for maintenance of analgesia. The primary outcome was AVD and secondary outcomes included Cesarean delivery, duration of labour, analgesia, side effects (nausea and vomiting, motor block, hypotension, pruritus, and urinary retention), and neonatal outcomes. The odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects modelling. An OR \ 1 or a WMD \ 0 favoured LCs. Results Eleven studies met our criteria (eight bupivacaine and three ropivacaine studies), providing 1,145 patients in the LCs group and 852 patients in the HCs group for analysis of the primary outcome. Low concentrations were associated with a reduction in the incidence of AVD (OR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.86; P \ 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of Cesarean delivery (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.33; P = 0.7). The LCs group had less motor block (OR 3.9; 95% CI 1.59 to 9.55; P = 0.003), greater ambulation (OR 2.8; 95% CI 1.1 to 7.14; P = 0.03), less urinary retention (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.002), and a shorter second stage of labour (WMD -14.03; 95% CI -27.52 to -0.55; P = 0.04) compared with the HCs group. There were no differences between groups in pain scores, maternal nausea and vomiting, hypotension, fetal heart rate abnormalities, five-minute Apgar scores, and need for neonatal resuscitation. One-minute Apgar scores \ 7 favoured the HCs group (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.07 to 2.21; P = 0.02), and there was more pruritus in the LCs group (OR 3.36; 95% CI 1.00 to 11.31; P = 0.05). Conclusion When compared with HCs of local anesthetics, the use of LCs for labour epidural analgesia reduces the incidence of AVD. This may be due to a Author contributions Pervez Sultan, Caitriona Murphy, Stephen Halpern, and Brendan Carvalho made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study and were involved in drafting the article for important intellectual content. -013-9981-z reduction in the amount of local anesthetic used and the subsequent decrease in motor blockade. We therefore recommend the use of LCs of local anesthetics for epidural analgesia to optimize obstetric outcome.123 Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth (2013) 60:840-854 DOI 10.1007/s12630 RésuméObjectif Nous connaissons mal l'influence de différentes concentrations d'anesthésique local pour la péridurale...

O uso de analgesia farmacológica influencia no desfecho de parto?

“…(5,19) This motor depression has been questioned as a minimum, depending on the concentration of medication used. (19,20) Another explanation may be that most pregnant women are primiparous, whose labor is usually longer. (21) This finding points to the need to expand studies to better evaluate this association, as well as to inform women about this possibility when using pharmacological analgesia.…”

Tramadol Injection versus Epidural Analgesia in Controlling Labor Pain

“…The use of this technique allows the patient to be awake and sharing in all aspects of the birthing process [12]. Despite the acknowledged effectiveness of epidural analgesia and high levels of satisfaction in the majority of women, there are inherent risks and potential sources of dissatisfaction such as inadequate relief, prolongation of labor, need for urinary catheterization and increased risk of instrumental birth [13]. Tramadol hydrochloride a synthetic analogue of codeine has been suggested as equally effective analgesic and is cheaper.…”

Intrathecal Clonidine as Spinal Anaesthesia Adjuvant — Is there a Magical Dose?

“…remifentanyl for patient controlled analgesia, low dose of diluted local anaesthetics, addition of neuraxial adjuvants like opioids, neostigmine, and clonidine. [65,66,67,68] Most studied doses of intrathecal clonidine for labour analgesia range from 15 to 45 µg mixed with opioids and/or local anaesthetics. In a preliminary open-label protocol done in France by Mercier and coworkers [69] comparing sufentanil 5 µg+clonidine 30 µg versus sufentanil 5 µg alone injected intrathecally to alleviate pain during the first stage of labour, the authors demonstrated that clonidine potentiate labour analgesia and side effects such hypotension, maternal pruritus and sedation were similar in both groups.…”