Literature DB >> 11873026

Cesarean delivery: a randomized trial of epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor in nulliparous women.

Shiv K Sharma1, James M Alexander, Gary Messick, Steven L Bloom, Donald D McIntire, Jackie Wiley, Kenneth J Leveno.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Controversy concerning increased cesarean births as a result of epidural analgesia for relief of labor pain has been attributed, in large part, to difficulties interpreting published studies because of design flaws. In this study, the authors compared epidural analgesia to intravenous meperidine analgesia using patient-controlled devices during labor to evaluate the effects of labor epidural analgesia, primarily on the rate of cesarean deliveries while minimizing limitations attributable to study design.
METHODS: Four hundred fifty-nine nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term were randomly assigned to receive either epidural analgesia or intravenous meperidine analgesia. Epidural analgesia was initiated with 0.25% bupivacaine and was maintained with 0.0625% bupivacaine and fentanyl 2 microg/ml at 6 ml/h with 5-ml bolus doses every 15 min as needed using a patient-controlled pump. Women in the intravenous analgesia group received 50 mg meperidine with 25 mg promethazine hydrochloride as an initial bolus, followed by 15 mg meperidine every 10 min as needed, using a patient-controlled pump. A written procedural manual that prescribed the intrapartum obstetric management was followed for each woman randomized in the study.
RESULTS: A total of 226 women were randomized to receive epidural analgesia, and 233 women were randomized to receive intravenous meperidine analgesia. Protocol violations occurred in 8% (38 of 459) of women. There was no difference in the rate of cesarean deliveries between the two analgesia groups (epidural analgesia, 7% [16 of 226; 95% confidence interval, 4-11%] vs. intravenous meperidine analgesia, 9% [20 of 233; 95% confidence interval, 5-13%]; P = 0.61). Significantly more women randomized to epidural analgesia had forceps deliveries compared with those randomized to meperidine analgesia (12% [26 of 226] vs. 3% [7 of 233]; P < 0.001). Women who received epidural analgesia reported lower pain scores during labor and delivery compared with women who received intravenous meperidine analgesia.
CONCLUSIONS: Epidural analgesia compared with intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor does not increase cesarean deliveries in nulliparous women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11873026     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200203000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  20 in total

1.  Epidurals and backache: again?

Authors:  Felicity Reynolds
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-11-02

Review 2.  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 3.  Does epidural analgesia increase rate of cesarean section?

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

4.  Clinical chorioamnionitis at term II: the intra-amniotic inflammatory response.

Authors:  Roberto Romero; Piya Chaemsaithong; Steven J Korzeniewski; Adi L Tarca; Gaurav Bhatti; Zhonghui Xu; Juan P Kusanovic; Zhong Dong; Nikolina Docheva; Alicia Martinez-Varea; Bo Hyun Yoon; Sonia S Hassan; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Lami Yeo
Journal:  J Perinat Med       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.901

5.  Epidural analgesia and risks of cesarean and operative vaginal deliveries in nulliparous and multiparous women.

Authors:  Uyen-Sa D T Nguyen; Kenneth J Rothman; Serkalem Demissie; Debra J Jackson; Janet M Lang; Jeffrey L Ecker
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2010-09

Review 6.  A Review of the Impact of Obstetric Anesthesia on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.

Authors:  Grace Lim; Francesca L Facco; Naveen Nathan; Jonathan H Waters; Cynthia A Wong; Holger K Eltzschig
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  Clinical chorioamnionitis at term IV: the maternal plasma cytokine profile.

Authors:  Roberto Romero; Piya Chaemsaithong; Nikolina Docheva; Steven J Korzeniewski; Adi L Tarca; Gaurav Bhatti; Zhonghui Xu; Juan P Kusanovic; Zhong Dong; Noppadol Chaiyasit; Ahmed I Ahmed; Bo Hyun Yoon; Sonia S Hassan; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Lami Yeo
Journal:  J Perinat Med       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.901

8.  Clinical chorioamnionitis at term III: how well do clinical criteria perform in the identification of proven intra-amniotic infection?

Authors:  Roberto Romero; Piya Chaemsaithong; Steven J Korzeniewski; Juan P Kusanovic; Nikolina Docheva; Alicia Martinez-Varea; Ahmed I Ahmed; Bo Hyun Yoon; Sonia S Hassan; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Lami Yeo
Journal:  J Perinat Med       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.901

Review 9.  Regional anaesthesia in pre-eclampsia: advantages and disadvantages.

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

10.  Efficacy and Effects of Parenteral Pethidine or Meptazinol and Regional Analgesia for Pain Relief during Delivery. A Comparative Observational Study.

Authors:  J Singer; A Jank; S Amara; P D H Stepan; U Kaisers; C Hoehne
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.