Literature DB >> 10895743

Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labour.

B A Loughnan1, F Carli, M Romney, C J Doré, H Gordon.   

Abstract

We compared the incidence of Caesarean delivery in nulliparous women randomized to receive epidural analgesia with those randomized to intramuscular (i.m.) pethidine. On admission to the delivery suite in established labour, 802 nulliparae had already agreed to be randomized with respect to their first analgesia. One hundred and eighty-eight women required either no analgesia or 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen (Entonox) only. Of the remaining 614 women, 310 were randomly allocated to receive i.m. pethidine up to 300 mg and 304 to receive epidural bupivacaine. Labour management was standardized according to the criteria for active management of labour. The intention-to-treat analysis showed similar Caesarean section rates in those randomized to epidural (12%) or pethidine analgesia (13%). The difference in Caesarean rate was -1.1% with 95% confidence intervals from -6.3% to +4.1%. The normal vaginal delivery rates were similar (epidural, 59%; pethidine, 61%).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10895743     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bja.a013580

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Anaesth        ISSN: 0007-0912            Impact factor:   9.166


  9 in total

Review 1.  Rates of caesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery in nulliparous women after low concentration epidural infusions or opioid analgesia: systematic review.

Authors:  E H C Liu; A T H Sia
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-28

Review 2.  Does epidural analgesia increase rate of cesarean section?

Authors:  Michael C Klein
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 3.  Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis.

Authors:  Dean Fergusson; Shawn D Aaron; Gordon Guyatt; Paul Hébert
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-09-21

Review 4.  Epidural analgesia for childbirth: effects of newer techniques on neonatal outcome.

Authors:  Giorgio Capogna; Michela Camorcia
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.022

Review 5.  [Recent standards in management of obstetric anesthesia].

Authors:  Maximiliaan van Erp; Clemens Ortner; Stefan Jochberger; Klaus Ulrich Klein
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2017-07-25

Review 6.  Regional anaesthesia in pre-eclampsia: advantages and disadvantages.

Authors:  Nanda Gopal Mandal; Sridhar Surapaneni
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 7.  Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour.

Authors:  Millicent Anim-Somuah; Rebecca Md Smyth; Allan M Cyna; Anna Cuthbert
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-21

8.  Maternal and foetal outcome after epidural labour analgesia in high-risk pregnancies.

Authors:  Sukhen Samanta; Kajal Jain; Neerja Bhardwaj; Vanita Jain; Sujay Samanta; Rini Saha
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2016-02

9.  Epidural analgesia and its implications in the maternal health in a low parity comunity.

Authors:  Ivan Penuela; Pilar Isasi-Nebreda; Hedylamar Almeida; Mario López; Esther Gomez-Sanchez; Eduardo Tamayo
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 3.007

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.