5. COMPARISON OF THE ANALGESIC EFFECT OF CONTINUOUS ANAESTHESIA INFLATION WITH AUTOMATIC INTERVAL INJECTION OF SMALL DOSES (PIEB) IN EPIDURAL ANESTHESIA DURING LABOR
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To compare the pain relief effectiveness in labor of continuous anesthetic infusion method and automatic intermittent injection of small doses of anesthetic during epidural anesthesia.
Methods: Randomized clinical description with comparison. 100 patients were randomly distributed into 2 equal groups. The patient received L3-4 epidural anesthesia. After a test dose of 8 ml Ropivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 1µg/ml (divided into 2 times / 5 minutes). Group P (PIEB) 8ml injected into the spinal cavity each time (Lockout 60 minutes). Group C (CEI) was run continuously at 8ml/60 min. If the VAS score is ≥ 4, the patient injects 6 ml of anesthetic (PCA). If the patient still has a VAS score ≥ 4, give a rescue dose of 6ml of Lidocaine 1%. The bolus dose in group P: 15 minutes after electric syringe bolus (VAS ≥ 4). Bolus dose in group C: dose for continuous infusion with VAS ≥ 4. Evaluation: Time to anesthesia induction, VAS pain score, rescue dose, lidocaine (mg), ropivacaine (mg) and fentanyl (µg), patient satisfaction.
Results: VAS scores at the time of cervical dilation, pushing stage, VAS at perineal stage and uterine control in group P were lower than in group C. Adding 1 rescue dose of group P (12%) was lower than that of group C (28%), Lidocaine group P (113.4 ± 33.6 mg) was lower than that of group C (128 ± 45.3 mg), Ropivacaine group P ( 47.8 ± 10.8 mg) was lower than that of group C (54.5 ± 11.4 mg), patient satisfaction in group P (96%) higher than group C (84%) with p < 0.05.
Conclusions: VAS score of group P is lower than group C, rescue dose, amount of anesthetic of group P is lower than group C. Satisfaction of pregnant women in group P (96%) was higher than in group C (84%), a difference statistically significant with p < 0.05
Article Details
Keywords
automated intermittent injection of small doses (PIEB), epidural anesthesia, labor
References
[2] Munro A, George RB. Programmed Intermittent Epidural Boluses (PIEB): A Superior Technique for Maitenance of Labor Analgesia. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2017;45(2):67-69. doi:10.5152/TJAR.2017.09032
[3] Wang X xue, Zhang X lan, Zhang Z xia, et al. Programmed intermittent epidural bolus in parturients. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(5):e28742. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000028742
[4] Atienzar MC, Palanca JM, Borras R, Esteve I, Fernandez M, Miranda A. Ropivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 2 microg mL(-1) by epidural infusion for labour analgesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2004;21(10):770-775. doi:10.1017/s0265021504000031
[5] Chora I, Hussain A. Comparison of 0.1% Ropivacaine-Fentanyl with 0.1% Bupivacaine-Fentanyl Epidurally for Labour Analgesia. Advances in Anesthesiology. 2014;2014:e237034. doi:10.1155/2014/237034
[6] Haidl F, Arne Rosseland L, Rørvik AM, Dahl V. Programmed intermittent boluses vs continuous epidural infusion in labor using an adrenaline containing solution: A randomized trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2020;64(10):1505-1512. doi:10.1111/aas.13689
[7] George RB, Allen TK, Habib AS. Intermittent epidural bolus compared with continuous epidural infusions for labor analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg. 2013;116(1):133-144. doi:10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182713b26
[8] Đỗ Văn Lợi. Nghiên Cứu Hiệu Quả Giảm Đau Trong Chuyển Dạ Của Phương Pháp Gây Tê Ngoài Màng Cứng Do và Không Do Bệnh Nhân Tự Điều Khiển. Luận án Tiến sĩ Y học. Đại học Y Hà Nội; 2017.