Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://app.periodikos.com.br/journal/rba/article/doi/10.1016/j.bjane.2014.09.006
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Scientific Article

Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour: its effects on delivery outcome

Analgesia combinada raquiperidural em trabalho de parto: seus efeitos sobre o desfecho do parto

Suneet Kaur Sra Charanjit Singh; Nurlia Yahya; Karis Misiran; Azlina Masdar; Nadia Md Nor; Lee Choon Yee

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2014.09.006 Braz J Anesthesiol, vol.66, n3, p.259-264, 2016
PDF English
PDF Português
Downloads: 1
Views: 896

Abstract

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) has become an increasingly popular alternative to traditional labour epidural due to its rapid onset and reliable analgesia provided. This was a prospective, convenient sampling study to determine the effects of CSE analgesia on labour outcome. METHODS: One hundred and ten healthy primigravida parturients with a singleton pregnancy of ≥37 weeks gestation and in the active phase of labour were studied. They were enrolled to the CSE (n = 55) or Non-CSE (n = 55) group based on whether they consented to CSE analgesia. Non-CSE parturients were offered other methods of labour analgesia. The duration of the first and second stage of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and Apgar scores were compared. RESULTS: The mean duration of the first and second stage of labour was not significantly different between both groups. Instrumental delivery rates between the groups were not significantly different (CSE group, 11% versus Non-CSE group, 16%). The slightly higher incidence of cesarean section in the CSE group (16% versus 15% in the Non-CSE group) was not statistically significant. Neonatal outcome in terms of Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 and 5 min was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the duration of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and neonatal outcome in parturients who received compared to those who did not receive CSE for labour analgesia.

Keywords

Combined spinal-epidural, Labour analgesia, Foetal outcome, Duration of labour

Resumo

RESUMO JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A analgesia combinada raquiperidural (RP) tornou-se uma opção cada vez mais popular para o trabalho de parto tradicional devido ao seu rápido início de ação e ao resultado confiável. Este foi um estudo prospectivo de amostragem conveniente para determinar os efeitos da RP sobre o desfecho do parto. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídas 110 parturientes primigestas saudáveis, com gestação única de ≥ 37 semanas e na fase ativa do trabalho de parto. As pacientes foram designadas para os grupos RP (n = 55) ou não RP (n = 55) com base em seus consentimentos para a analgesia combinada RP. As parturientes do grupo não RP receberam outros métodos de analgesia para o parto. As durações do primeiro e segundo estágio do trabalho de parto, as taxas de parto vaginal instrumental e cesariana de emergência e os escores de Apgar foram comparados. RESULTADOS: A média de duração do primeiro e segundo estágio do trabalho de parto não foi significativamente diferente entre os dois grupos. As taxas de parto instrumental não foram significativamente diferentes entre os grupos, RP (11%) versus não RP (16%). A incidência ligeiramente maior de cesariana no grupo RP (16% versus 15% no não RP) não foi estatisticamente significativa. O desfecho neonatal em termos de índice de Apgar foi inferior a 7. CONCLUSÃO: Não houve diferenças significativas em relação à duração do trabalho, às taxas de parto vaginal instrumental e cesariana de emergência e ao desfecho neonatal em parturientes que receberam RP para analgesia de parto em comparação com aquelas que não receberam.

Palavras-chave

Combinação raqui-peridural, Analgesia de parto, Resultado fetal, Duração do parto

References

ACOG Committee Opinion No. 295. American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:213.

McGrady E. Epidural analgesia in labour. Cont Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain. 2004;4:114-7.

Kuczkowski KM. Ambulation with combined spinal-epidural labor analgesia; the technique. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2004;55:29-34.

Frikha N, Ellachtar M, Mebazaa M. Combined spinal-epidural in labor-comparison of sulfentanil vs tramadol. Middle East J Anesth. 2007;19:87-96.

Gambling D, Berkowitz J, Farrell TR. A randomized controlled comparison of epidural analgesia and combined spinal-epidural analgesia in a private setting. Anesth Analg. 2013;116:636-43.

Mousa WF, Al-Metwalli R, Mostafa M. Epidural analgesia during labor vs no analgesia a comparative study. Saudi J Anaesth. 2012;6:36-40.

Simmons SW, Taghizadeh N, Dennis AT. Combined spinal-epidural versus epidural analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;10:CD003401.

Anim-Somuah M, Smyth RMD, Jones L. Epidural versus non- epidural or no analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;12:CD000331.

Liu EHC, Sia ATH. Rates of caesarian section and instrumental vaginal delivery in nulliparous women after low concen- tration epidural infusions or opioid analgesia. Br Med J. 2004;328:1410-5.

Halpern SH, Leighton BL, Oh Isson A. Effect of epidural vs parenteral opioids analgesics on progress of labour a meta analysis. J Am Med Assoc. 1998;280:2105-10.

Philipsen T, Jensen NH. Epidural block or parenteral pethidine as analgesic in labour a randomized study concerning progress in labour and instrumental deliveries. Eur J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;30:27-33.

Leong EW, Sivanesaratnam V, Oh LL. Epidural analgesia in primigravidae in spontaneous labour at term a prospective study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2000;26:271-5.

Cambic CR, Wong CA. Labour analgesia and obstetric outcomes. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105:50-60.

Wu CY, Ren LR, Wang ZH. Effects of epidural ropivacaine labor analgesia on duration of labor and mode of delivery. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2005;40:369-71.

Rojansky N, Tanos V, Shapira S. Effect of epidural analge- sia on duration and outcome of induced labour. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1997;56:237-44.

Alexander JM, Sharma SK, McIntire DD. Epidural analgesia lengthens the friedman active phase of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:44-50.

Halpern SH, Leighton BL. Epidural analgesia and the progress of Labor. Evidence-based obstetric anaesthesia.. 2005.

Tsen LC, Thue B, Datta S. Is combined spinal-epidural analgesia associated with more rapid cervical dilatation in nul- liparous patients when compared with conventional epidural analgesia. Anesthesiology. 1999;91:920-5.

Schnider SM, Abboud TK, Artal R. Maternal catecholamines decrease during labor after lumbar epidural anesthesia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1983;147:13-5.

Sultan P, Murphy C, Halpern S. The effect of low con- centrations versus high concentrations of local anesthetics for labour analgesia on obstetric and anesthetic outcomes a meta- analysis. Can J Anesth. 2013;60:840-54.

Norris MC, Fogel ST, Conway C. Combined spinal-epidural versus epidural labor analgesia. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:913-20.

Stacey RG, Poon A. Comparison of low dose epidural with combined spinal-epidural analgesia for labour. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84:695-8.

Miro M, Guasch E, Gilsanz F. Comparison of epidural analgesia with combined spinal-epidural for labor. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2008;17:15-9.

Van der Velde M. Combined spinal epidural analgesia for labor and delivery a review. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2004;55:17-27.

5dcd76540e88252e23bf58f3 rba Articles
Links & Downloads
2352-2291 (Electronic) 0104-0014 (Printed)
Braz J Anesthesiol ©2024 All rights reserved.

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections