A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing patient-controlled epidural with intravenous analgesia for pain relief in labor. A randomized trial of intrapartum analgesia in women with severe preeclampsia. Epidural block or parenteral pethidine as analgesic in labour; a randomized study concerning progress in labour and instrumental deliveries. Randomized trial of epidural versus intravenous analgesia during labor. A randomized trial of labor analgesia in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension. Intramuscular opioids for maternal pain relief in labour: a randomised controlled trial comparing pethidine with diamorphine. Labor analgesia: a comparative study between combined spinal-epidural anesthesia versus continuous epidural anesthesia. Labor analgesia in preeclampsia: remifentanil patient controlled intravenous analgesia versus epidural analgesia. The influence of epidural analgesia on cesarean delivery rates: a randomized, prospective clinical trial.
In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, we sought to determine whether patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for labor affected the incidence of cesarean delivery when compared with patient-controlled IV opioid analgesia (PCIA). Healthy, term nulliparous patients in 4 Canadian institutions were randomly assigned to receive PCIA with fentanyl (n = 118) or PCEA with 0.08% bupivacaine and fentanyl 1.6 microg/mL (n = 124). There was no difference in the incidence of cesarean delivery-10.2% (12 of 118) versus 9.7% (12 of 124)-or instrumental vaginal delivery-21.2% (25 of 118) versus 29% (36 of 124)-between groups. The duration of the second stage of labor was increased in the PCEA group by a median of 23 min (P = 0.02). Fifty-one patients (43%) in the PCIA group received epidural analgesia: 39 (33%) because of inadequate pain relief and 12 (10%) to facilitate operative delivery. Patients in the PCIA group required more antiemetic therapy (17% versus 6.4%; P = 0.01) and had more sedation (39% versus 5%; P < 0.001). Maternal mean pain and satisfaction with analgesia scores were better in the PCEA group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively). More neonates in the PCIA group required active resuscitation (52% versus 31%; P = 0.001) and naloxone (17% versus 3%; P < 0.001). These observations support the hypothesis that PCEA does not result in an increased incidence of obstetrical intervention compared with PCIA. PCEA provides superior analgesia and less maternal and neonatal sedation compared with PCIA. To estimate whether the cesarean delivery rate differs between women with severe preeclampsia who receive intrapartum epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia.
                Women with severe preeclampsia at at least 24 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned to receive either intrapartum epidural (n = 56) versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (n = 60), and each was administered by a standardized protocol. The sample size was selected to have 80% power to detect at least a 50% difference in the predicted intergroup cesarean delivery rates. Data were analyzed by intent to treat.
                Selected maternal characteristics and neonatal outcomes were similar in the two groups. The cesarean delivery rates in the epidural group (18%) and the patient-controlled analgesia group (12%) were similar (P =.35). Women who received epidural analgesia were more likely to require ephedrine for the treatment of hypotension (9% versus 0%, P =.02), but their infants were less likely to require naloxone at delivery (9% versus 54%, P <.001). Epidural analgesia provided significantly better pain relief as determined by a visual analogue intrapartum pain score (P <.001) and a postpartum pain management survey (P =.002).
                Compared with patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, intrapartum epidural analgesia did not significantly increase the cesarean delivery rate in women with severe preeclampsia at our level III center, and it provided superior pain relief. A prospective randomized study was performed to evaluate the influence of epidural analgesia compared to parenteral pethidine in parturients with pain in the first stage of labour on the progress of labour and the frequency of instrumental deliveries. There was no significant difference in the two groups in the duration of either the first or second stage of labour. The overall instrumental delivery rate was 25%, with no difference between the groups. The analgesic efficacy of the epidural blockade was significantly better than that of parenteral pethidine. We conclude that epidural bupivacaine with our technique and obstetric practice did neither prolong labour nor increase the frequency of instrumental delivery. To compare the effects of epidural analgesia with intravenous (IV) analgesia on the outcome of labor.
                Thirteen hundred thirty women with uncomplicated term pregnancies and in spontaneous labor were randomized to be offered epidural bupivacaine-fentanyl or IV meperidine analgesia during labor.
                Comparison of the allocation groups by intent to treat revealed a significant association between epidural allocation and operative delivery for dystocia. However, only 65% of each randomization group accepted the allocated treatment. Four hundred thirty-seven women accepted and received meperidine as allocated, and they were compared with 432 women accepting epidural allocation. Significant associations resulted between epidural administration and prolongation of labor, increased rate of oxytocin administration, chorioamnionitis, low forceps, and cesarean delivery. Because of the high rate of noncompliance with treatment allocation, a multifactorial regression analysis was performed on the entire cohort, and a twofold relative risk of cesarean delivery persisted in association with epidural treatment. The impact of epidural treatment on cesarean delivery was significant for both nulliparous and parous women (risk ratios 2.55 and 3.81, respectively). Epidural analgesia provided significantly better pain relief in labor than did parenteral meperidine.
                Although labor epidural analgesia is superior to meperidine for pain relief, labor is prolonged, uterine infection is increased, and the number of operative deliveries are increased. A two- to fourfold increased risk of cesarean delivery is associated with epidural treatment in both nulliparous and parous women. The purpose of this study was to compare the peripartum and perinatal effects of epidural with intravenous labor analgesia in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension.
                Women with pregnancy-induced hypertension who had consented to participate were randomized to receive either epidural or intravenous analgesia for labor pain. Both methods were given according to standardized protocols. All women received magnesium sulfate seizure prophylaxis. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes were compared according to intent-to-treat allocation.
                Seven hundred thirty-eight women were randomized: 372 women were given epidural analgesia, and 366 women were given intravenous analgesia. Maternal characteristics were similar, including the severity of hypertension. Epidural analgesia was associated with a significantly prolonged second-stage labor, an increase in forceps deliveries, and an increase in chorioamnionitis. Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal outcomes were similar. Pain relief was superior with the epidural method. Hypotension required treatment in 11% of women in the epidural group.
                Epidural labor analgesia provides superior pain relief but no additional therapeutic benefit to women with pregnancy-induced hypertension. To compare the pain relief and side effects of intramuscular pethidine with intramuscular diamorphine in labour.
                Double-blind randomised controlled trial.
                The labour ward in a UK teaching hospital.
                Sixty-nine nulliparous women and 64 multiparous women in labour who requested narcotic analgesia and remained undelivered one hour after trial entry.
                Nulliparous women were randomised to receive either 150 mg intramuscular pethidine or 7.5 mg intramuscular diamorphine. Multiparous women were randomised to receive either 100 mg intramuscular pethidine or 5 mg intramuscular diamorphine. All participants received the anti-emetic prochloroperazine at the same time as the trial drugs.
                Maternal analgesia assessed by a visual analogue score and verbal scales of pain intensity and pain relief, maternal sedation and vomiting, neonatal outcome assessed by Apgar scores and the need for resuscitation.
                More women allocated to receiving pethidine than to diamorphine reported slight or no pain relief at 60 minutes after administration of these drugs (P = 0.03). This trend was repeated in most of the other measures for maternal analgesia. There was no difference in maternal sedation, but the incidence of vomiting within 60 minutes was lower for women who received diamorphine (P = 0.02). Pethidine was associated with lower Apgar scores at 1 minute (P < 0.05).
                Intramuscular diamorphine in labour appears to have some benefits, compared with intramuscular pethidine, but the trial was small and further research, particularly into alternative opioids and long term effects on the infants is still needed. Pain relief during labor is a permanent concern, aiming at the maternal well being, decreasing the stress secondary to pain, and reducing its consequences on the fetus. Several analgesia techniques can be used during labor. The aim of this study was to compare continuous and combined epidural analgesia, both of them using 0.25% bupivacaine with 50% enantiomeric excess and fentanyl.
                Forty pregnant women, in labor, with cervical dilation between 4 and 5 cm, were randomly divided in two groups. Group I received continuous epidural anesthesia. Group II received combined anesthesia. The following parameters were evaluated: anthropometric measurements, gestational age, cervical dilation, length of time between the blockade and absence of pain according to the visual analogic scale, ability to walk, length of time between analgesia and complete cervical dilation, duration of the expulsive phase, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn. Possible complications, such as respiratory depression, maternal hypotension, pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were also evaluated. The Student t test was used to compare the means and the Chi-square test was used to compare the number of pregnancies and type of labor.
                There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding the length of time between the beginning of analgesia and complete cervical dilation, as well as regarding the duration of the expulsive phase, incidence of cesarean section related to the analgesia, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn.
                Both techniques are effective and safe for labor analgesia, although the combined technique provided fast and immediate pain relief. Clinical studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to evaluate the differences in the incidence of cesarean sections. Epidural analgesia is considered to be the preferred method of labor analgesia in preeclamptic patients. Systemic opioids are another good effective, easy to administer alternative but may cause maternal and fetal respiratory depression. Remifentanil's rapid onset and offset of effects, should make it an ideal drug for the intermittent painful contraction during labor. Method. 30 preeclamptic patients were randomly assigned to one of two equal groups; Epidural Group: received epidural analgesia according to a standardized protocol using bupivacaine plus fentanyl. REMIFENTANIL GROUP: PCA was set up to deliver remlfentanil 0.5 microg/kg as a loading bolus infused over 20 seconds, lockout time of 5 minutes, PCA bolus of 0.25 microg/kg, continuous background infusion of 0.05 microg/kg/min, and maximum dose is 3 mg in 4 hours. Women were advised to start the PCA bolus when they feel the signs of a coming uterine contraction.
                All women demonstrated a significant decrease in VAS score in the first hour after administration of analgesia (P < 0.05). Analgesic quality as regard Visual Analog Pain Scores, sedation score, and post-delivery patient satisfaction in both groups, are comparable (P > 0.05). PCA remifentanil infusion until time of delivery produce no observable maternal, fetal or neonatal side effects (P < 0.05).
                PCA intravenous remifentanil is an effective option for pain relief with minimal maternal and neonatal side effects in labor for preeclamptic patients with contraindications to epidural analgesia or requesting opioid analgesia. The effects of epidural analgesia on the progress of labor are controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of epidural analgesia on cesarean delivery rates in a population of patients randomly assigned to receive either epidural analgesia or intravenous opioids for intrapartum pain relief.
                From January 1995 to May 1996, 318 spontaneously laboring, term, nulliparous patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous opioids or epidural analgesia for pain relief. Labor was managed according to the principles of active management of labor. Cesarean delivery was performed for obstetric indications. Data analysis was conducted on an intent-to-treat basis. A subanalysis was subsequently performed on patients who were compliant with the allocated form of treatment.
                One hundred sixty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous meperidine and 156 were randomly assigned to receive epidural analgesia. Maternal age, gravidity, race, gestational age, and cervical dilatation at admission and at first analgesic dose did not differ between the groups. Intent-to-treat data analysis revealed no significant difference in the cesarean delivery rate between the 2 groups, being 13.6% in the opioid group and 9.6% in the epidural group (relative risk 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.31, P >.05). Cesarean delivery rates for the indication of dystocia also did not differ, being 10.5% in the opioid group and 5.8% in the epidural group (relative risk 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.26-1.21, P >.05). Subanalysis of the data from patients who were compliant with the allocated form of treatment revealed that patients in the epidural group (n = 147) were 3 times more likely to have an active phase duration >/=8 hours and were 10 times more likely to require >/=2 hours in the second stage of labor than were those in the opioid group (n = 78). There were no significant differences in cesarean delivery rates in this subanalysis, being 7.7% in the opioid group and 8.8% in the epidural group (relative risk 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.91, P >. 05). The cesarean delivery rates for dystocia were also similar in the subanalysis, being 3.8% in the opioid group and 5.5% in the epidural group (relative risk 1.42, 95% confidence interval 0.39-5. 22, P >.05).
                Epidural analgesia provides safe and effective intrapartum pain control and may be administered without undesirable effects on labor outcome.
Parenteral opioids provide some relief from pain in labour but are associated with adverse effects. Maternal satisfaction with opioid analgesia was largely unreported but appeared moderate at best. This review needs to be examined alongside related Cochrane reviews examining pain management in labour. More research is needed to determine which analgesic intervention is most effective, and provides greatest satisfaction to women with acceptable adverse effects for mothers and their newborn.