Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 14 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 390-394

Parturient controlled epidural analgesia with and without basal infusion of ropivacaine and fentanyl: A randomized trial


1 Department of Anesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2 Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, A.I.I.M.S. Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
3 Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, A.I.I.M.S, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India
4 Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Dr. S. N. Medical Collage, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
5 Department of Anesthesiology, Government Medical Collage, Barmer, Rajasthan, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Ravi Shankar Sharma
Room No. 16, Pain Medicine OPD, Department of Anaesthesiology, AIIMS, Rishikesh 249 203, Uttarakhand
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_116_20

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Parturient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) is an established method of providing safe and effective labor analgesia. Objective: The aim of this single-blind, randomized controlled trial was to compare the efficacy of PCEA with or without basal infusion (BI) of ropivacaine and fentanyl for the effective management of labor pain associated with normal vaginal delivery. Materials and Methods: A total of 78 nulliparous parturients with vertex presentation at term and with cervical dilatation of 3–5 cm demanding for epidural analgesia (EA) were enrolled in the study. EA was initiated and maintained with ropivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl 2 μg/mL. Following an initial epidural loading volume of 8–10 mL, parturients were randomly allocated in two groups of 39 each. PCEA group received bolus of 5 mL at 200 mL/h with lockout interval of 15 min and with maximum volume of local anaesthetic was 20 mL/h and PCEA + BI group – receiving added BI rate of 5 mL/h along with same programmed parameters of PCEA pump. Results: No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of demographic characteristics, duration of labor, delivery methods, maternal satisfaction as well as Apgar score. Mean demand bolus in group PCEA + BI was 0.39 ± 0.59, whereas in group PCEA was 3.31 ± 0.77 (P < 0.05). Mean volume of drug used in group PCEA + BI was 25.57 ± 2.75 mL, while in group PCEA was 22.42 ± 4.56 mL (P = 0.0005). In PCEA + BI group, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was 0.07 ± 0.35 at 60 min and 0.06 ± 0.33 at 120 min, whereas in PCEA group, VAS was 0.32 ± 0.62 at 60 min and 0.26 ± 0.50 at 120 min (P = 0.05), respectively. Conclusion: BI when added to PCEA, it significantly reduces breakthrough labor pain and demand boluses without prolonging labor duration but at the cost of increased requirement of drug volume when compared to PCEA only group.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed94    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded10    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal