Epidural Analgesia for Labour: Comparing the Effects of Continuous Epidural Infusion (CEI) and Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus (PIEB) on Obstetric Outcomes.
Epidural anaesthesia
continuous epidural infusion
labour analgesia
programmed intermittent epidural bolus analgesia
Journal
Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care
ISSN: 2392-7518
Titre abrégé: Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care
Pays: Romania
ID NLM: 101681752
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
entrez:
27
2
2023
pubmed:
28
2
2023
medline:
28
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the last few years there is a trend of transiting from the continuous epidural infusion (CEI) method for epidural analgesia to a new method - programmed intermittent epidural analgesia (PIEB). This change improves the quality of epidural analgesia, thanks to an increased spread of the anaesthetic in the epidural space and higher maternal satisfaction. Nevertheless, we must make sure that such change of method does not lead to worse obstetric and neonatal outcomes. This is a retrospective observational case control study. We compared several obstetrical outcomes between the CEI and PIEB groups, such as the rates of instrumental delivery, rates of caesarean section, duration of first and second stages of labour well as APGAR scores. We further segmented the subjects and examined them in groups of nulliparous and multiparous parturients. 2696 parturients were included in this study: 1387 (51.4%) parturients in the CEI group and 1309 (48.6%) parturients in the PIEB group. No significant difference was found in instrumental or caesarean section delivery rates between groups. This result held even when the groups were differentiated between nulliparous and multiparous. No differences were revealed regarding first and second stage duration or APGAR scores. Our study demonstrates transition from the CEI to the PIEB method does not lead to any statistically significant effects on either obstetric or neonatal outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36846539
doi: 10.2478/rjaic-2021-0005
pii: rjaic-2021-0005
pmc: PMC9949009
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
29-35Informations de copyright
© 2021 Tal Avraham et al., published by Sciendo.
Références
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 22;9(1):2583
pubmed: 30796286
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2010 Jan;19(1):1-2
pubmed: 19959352
Br J Anaesth. 2006 Sep;97(3):359-64
pubmed: 16849382
BJA Educ. 2020 Mar;20(3):96-102
pubmed: 33456936
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Mar;222(3):267.e1-267.e9
pubmed: 31574290
Matern Child Health J. 2010 Sep;14(5):705-712
pubmed: 19760498
Anesth Analg. 1995 Nov;81(5):982-6
pubmed: 7486088
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Dec 07;(12):CD000331
pubmed: 22161362
Anesth Analg. 2015 Jul;121(1):149-158
pubmed: 25902319
Anesthesiology. 2018 Sep;129(3):448-458
pubmed: 29939847
Br J Anaesth. 1996 Apr;76(4):487-91
pubmed: 8652317
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2010 Oct;19(4):357-64
pubmed: 20832282
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 25;10(3):e0120907
pubmed: 25807240
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019 May;38:83-92
pubmed: 30509678
J Anesth. 2013 Feb;27(1):43-7
pubmed: 22965331
Drugs. 1991 Jan;41(1):69-80
pubmed: 1706989
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 May;186(5 Suppl Nature):S69-77
pubmed: 12011873
Anesth Analg. 2017 May;124(5):1571-1580
pubmed: 27828798
Anesth Analg. 2011 Oct;113(4):826-31
pubmed: 21788309
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 12;15(6):e0234353
pubmed: 32530935
Anesth Analg. 2010 Aug;111(2):482-7
pubmed: 20529986
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 17;5:CD011344
pubmed: 29770432
Br J Anaesth. 2016 Feb;116(2):277-81
pubmed: 26787798