Patient-controlled Epidural Infusion Research Articles

Addition of Clonidine to a Continuous Patient-controlled Epidural Infusion of Low-concentration Levobupivacaine Plus Sufentanil in Primiparous Women During Labor

Addition of Clonidine to a Continuous Patient-controlled Epidural Infusion of Low-concentration Levobupivacaine Plus Sufentanil in Primiparous Women During Labor

A Randomized Trial of Dural Puncture Epidural Technique Compared with the Standard Epidural Technique for Labor Analgesia

We designed this prospective, double-blind, randomized study to examine whether a dural puncture without intrathecal drug administration immediately before epidural drug administration would improve labor analgesia when compared to a traditional epidural technique without prior dural puncture. Eighty nulliparous parturients with cervical dilation less than 5 cm were randomly assigned to receive a standardized epidural technique, with or without a single dural puncture with a 25-gauge (G) Whitacre spinal needle. After successful placement of the needle(s) and the epidural catheter, 12 mL of bupivacaine 2.5 mg/mL was administered through the epidural catheter and a patient-controlled epidural infusion of bupivacaine 1.25 mg/mL + fentanyl 2 mug/mL was initiated. The presence of sacral analgesia (S1) and pain scores were compared between groups. In demographically similar groups, parturients with prior dural puncture had more frequent blockade of the S1 dermatome (absolute risk difference [95% confidence interval] 22% [6-39]), more frequent visual analog scale scores <10/100 at 20 min (absolute risk difference 20% [1-38]), and reduced one-sided analgesia (absolute risk difference [95% CI] 17% [2-330]). The highest median sensory level (T10) was no different between groups. Dural puncture with a 25-G spinal needle immediately before the initiation of epidural analgesia improves the sacral spread, onset, and bilateral pain relief produced by analgesic concentrations of bupivacaine with fentanyl in laboring nulliparous patients.

Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Patient-Controlled Epidural Infusion vs Nurse-Administered Epidural Infusion for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Colonic Resection

Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Patient-Controlled Epidural Infusion vs Nurse-Administered Epidural Infusion for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Colonic Resection

Randomized, double-blind comparison of patient-controlled epidural infusion vs nurse-administered epidural infusion for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing colonic resection

Randomized, double-blind comparison of patient-controlled epidural infusion vs nurse-administered epidural infusion for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing colonic resection

Randomized, double-blind comparison of patient-controlled epidural infusion vs nurse-administered epidural infusion for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing colonic resection

There is little published evidence of the analgesic efficacy of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for postoperative pain relief. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of epidural infusion of bupivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl 4 microg ml(-1) administered by either PCEA with a background infusion or nurse-administered continuous epidural infusion (CEI) after major intra-abdominal surgery. In a double-blind, randomized clinical trial, 205 adult patients undergoing colonic resection by laparotomy received either PCEA or CEI. Pain scores were recorded via a four-point verbal rating scale at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery. The administration of epidural top-ups and systemic analgesia over the same period was also recorded, and patient satisfaction questionnaires completed. The median area under the curve of pain against time was significantly lower in the PCEA group (2 vs 24, P<0.001) as were median summary pain scores on movement (0.67 vs 1.33, P<0.001). Significantly fewer patients in the PCEA group received one or more epidural top-ups (13 vs 36%, P = 0.0002) or any systemic analgesics (41 vs 63%, P = 0.0021). Patients in the PCEA group were significantly more likely to be very satisfied than in the CEI group (76 vs 43%, P<0.0001). PCEA provides greater analgesic efficacy than CEI for postoperative analgesia after major intra-abdominal surgery, and a decreased requirement for physician or nurse intervention.

Intraoperative epidural anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with levobupivacaine for major orthopedic surgery: a double-blind, randomized comparison of racemic bupivacaine and ropivacaine

Study Objective: To compare the onset time and duration of epidural anesthesia, and the quality of postoperative analgesia produced by levobupivacaine, racemic bupivacaine, and ropivacaine. Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. Setting: Inpatient anesthesia at a University Hospital. Patients: 45 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients, undergoing elective total hip replacement. Interventions: After standard intravenous midazolam premedication and infusion of 500 mL of Ringer’s acetate solution, patients were randomly allocated to receive epidural block with 0.5% levobupivacaine (n = 15), 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 15), or 0.5% ropivacaine (n = 15). Postoperatively, after pinprick sensation recovered at T t, a patient-controlled epidural infusion was provided with 0.125% levobupivacaine, 0.125% bupivacaine, or 0.2% ropivacaine, respectively (baseline infusion rate 5 mL/hr; incremental bolus 2 mL, lockout time: 20 min). Intravenous ketoprofen was also available for rescue analgesia if required. Measurements and Main Results: The onset time of sensory block was 31 ± 16 minutes with levobupivacaine, 25 ± 19 minutes with bupivacaine, and 30 ± 24 minutes with ropivacaine (p = 0.98), after a median (range) volume of 15 (10-18) mL in Group Levobupivacaine, 14 (10-18) mL in Group Bupivacaine, and 15 (10-18) mL in Group Ropivacaine (p = 0.85). Six patients in the ropivacaine group (40%) showed an intraoperative Bromage score <2 as compared with only three patients of Group Levobupivacaine (20%) and no patient of Group Bupivacaine (p = 0.02). Recovery of pinprick sensation at T t occurred after 214 ± 61 minutes with levobupivacaine, 213 ± 53 minutes with bupivacaine, and 233 ± 34 minutes with ropivacaine ( p = 0.26). A similar degree of pain relief was observed in the three groups without differences in local anesthetic consumption and need for rescue analgesia. Motor blockade progressively resolved without differences among the three groups. Conclusions: Levobupivacaine 0.5% produces an epidural block of similar onset, quality, and duration as the one produced by the same volume of 0.5% bupivacaine, with a motor block deeper than that produced by 0.5% ropivacaine. When prolonging the block for the first 12 hours after surgery with a patient-controlled epidural infusion, 0.125% levobupivacaine provides adequate pain relief after major orthopedic surgery, with similar recovery of motor function as compared with 0.125% bupivacaine and 0.2% ropivacaine.

Lower extremity blocks for analgesia

A large proportion of patients undergoing surgery do not receive adequate postoperative analgesia.1 Postoperative pain is the leading cause of unplanned hospital admissions after ambulatory surgery and a major source of dissatisfaction with perioperative outcome.2 The establishment of acute pain services in major institutions both in the United States and overseas has had a major effect on postoperative comfort and patient satisfaction.3,4 Most acute pain services primarily use intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) or patient-controlled epidural infusion; however, advances in neuronal blockade offer an unprecedented range of effective and surgery site–specific analgesic options. Using long-acting local anesthetics, peripheral nerve blocks can be used to provide an excellent anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Additionally, a catheter for continuous infusion of local anesthetics can be inserted perineurally to extend the analgesia beyond the duration of the single-shot blocks. This review will discuss the advantages and limitations of various nerve block techniques when used for postoperative pain management for several common surgical indications. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Ropivacaine 0.075% and Bupivacaine 0.075% with Fentanyl 2 μg/mL are Equivalent for Labor Epidural Analgesia

Fifty percent effective dose estimates for ropivacaine and bupivacaine suggest that ropivacaine is 40% less potent than bupivacaine to initiate labor analgesia. At clinically used concentrations, however, the drugs seem indistinguishable for initiating and maintaining labor analgesia. We designed this study to evaluate a concentration near the reported 50% effective dose values for ropivacaine and bupivacaine in an attempt to detect differences between the drugs during routine clinical use. Fifty-nine nulliparous women in labor were randomized to receive 0.075% ropivacaine or bupivacaine, each with fentanyl 2 μg/mL. After epidural placement and the administration of a lidocaine/epinephrine test dose, 20 mL of study solution was administered and a patient-controlled epidural infusion was initiated with the following settings: 6 mL/h basal rate, 5 mL bolus, 10 min lockout, and 30 mL/h limit. Breakthrough pain was treated with 10-mL boluses of study solution. By using a study design to detect a 40% difference in hourly drug use between groups, we found no statistically significant differences in the amount of local anesthetic used, verbal pain scores, sensory levels, motor blockade, labor duration, mode of delivery, side effects, or patient satisfaction. We conclude that 0.075% ropivacaine and bupivacaine, with fentanyl, are equally effective for labor analgesia using the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique.

Epidural Patient-Controlled Analgesia After Cesarean Section

We compared the analgesia, side effects, and plasma concentrations of buprenorphine and fentanyl in a double-blind study of 78 parturients receiving one of these drugs by patient-controlled epidural infusion after elective cesarean section with epidural anesthesia. Patients were randomized to three epidural infusion groups: group 1 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL buprenorphine with 0.015% bupivacaine and 1 microgram/mL epinephrine; group 2 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL fentanyl with 0.015% bupivacaine and 1 microgram/mL epinephrine; and group 3 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL fentanyl with 0.015% bupivacaine. Plasma for determination of opioid concentrations was obtained in some subjects in each group at intervals up to 48 h during the infusion and in some subjects from each group at intervals after the infusion was stopped. Pain relief was similar and satisfactory in all three groups. The median overall satisfaction scores were high for all three groups. Pruritus was more common in the fentanyl groups (P less than 0.05). However, vomiting was more disturbing to the patients and seen only with buprenorphine. No patient had a respiratory rate less than 12 breaths/min. Epinephrine use was associated with a slower infusion rate (P less than 0.05, group 2 vs 3). All patients were able to ambulate without difficulty. Mean opioid plasma concentrations did not exceed 1.5 ng/mL. Thus, epidural patient-controlled analgesia in all three groups provided excellent analgesia, permitted ambulation, and was without serious side effects. Epidural buprenorphine offered no advantages over epidural fentanyl.