Search

Labour analgesia is a crucial aspect of obstetric anaesthesia, aiming to alleviate pain during childbirth while ensuring maternal and foetal safety. Over the past decade, advancements in labour analgesia techniques have evolved, impacting initiation, maintenance, and outcomes. We emphasize the longstanding importance of epidural analgesia while recognizing the growing significance of combined spinal-epidural and dural puncture epidural techniques for labour initiation. Analgesia maintenance is optimally achieved with an epidural bolus regimen, either manual boluses, programmed intermittent boluses or patient-controlled epidural analgesia. Utilizing high-volume, low-dose combinations of local anaesthetics with lipophilic opioids demonstrates synergistic effects, facilitating dose reduction and minimising adverse effects. Adjuvants can play a role in specific clinical contexts. The increasing significance of ultrasound guidance for procedural precision is highlighted. The intricate nature of labour pain management underscores the importance of both patient and clinician involvement in decision-making processes. Future advancements in this field have the potential to enhance the well-being of women as well as their newborns., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The aim of neuraxial analgesia is to achieve excellent pain relief with the fewest adverse effects. The most recently introduced technique for epidural analgesia maintenance is the programmed intermittent epidural bolus. In a recent study, we compared this with patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion and found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus was associated with less breakthrough pain, lower pain scores, higher local anaesthetic consumption and comparable motor block. However, we had compared 10 ml programmed intermittent epidural boluses with 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. To overcome this potential limitation, we designed a randomised, multicentre non-inferiority trial using 10 ml boluses in each group. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain and total analgesic intake. Secondary outcomes included motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. The trial was considered positive if two endpoints were met: non-inferiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to breakthrough pain; and superiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to local anaesthetic consumption. A total of 360 nulliparous women were allocated randomly to patient-controlled epidural analgesia-only or programmed intermittent epidural bolus groups. The patient-controlled group received 10 ml boluses of ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 μg.ml -1 ; the programmed intermittent group received 10 ml boluses supplemented by 5 ml patient-controlled boluses. The lockout period was 30 min in each group and the maximum allowed hourly local anaesthetic/opioid consumption was identical between the groups. Breakthrough pain was similar between groups (11.2% patient controlled vs. 10.8% programmed intermittent, p = 0.003 for non-inferiority). Total ropivacaine consumption was lower in the PCEA-group (mean difference 15.3 mg, p < 0.001). Motor block, patient satisfaction scores and maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar across both groups. In conclusion, patient-controlled epidural analgesia is non-inferior to programmed intermittent epidural bolus if equal volumes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia are used to maintain labour analgesia and superior with respect to local anaesthetic consumption., (© 2023 Association of Anaesthetists.)

Epidural and spinal blocks are well-accepted neuraxial techniques but both have several disadvantages. Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) can combine the best features of both techniques and reduce or eliminate these disadvantages. It provides the rapidity, density, and reliability of subarachnoid block with the flexibility of catheter epidural technique to extend the duration of anesthesia/analgesia (and to improve spinal block). It is an excellent technique for determining minimum intrathecal drug doses. Although most commonly employed in obstetric practice, CSE is also used in a wide variety of non-obstetric surgical procedures including orthopedic, vascular, gynecological, urological, and general surgical procedures. The needle-through-needle technique remains the most commonly used method to perform CSE. Several technical variations including Sequential CSE and Epidural Volume Extention (EVE) are commonly used particularly in obstetric and high-risk patients such as those with cardiac disease where a slower onset of sympathetic block is desirable. The risks of complications such as epidural catheter migration through the dural hole, neurological complications, and subarachnoid spread of epidurally administered drugs are possible but have not been a clinically relevant problem in the 40+ years of their existence. In obstetrics, CSE is used for labor pain because it produces rapid-onset analgesia with reduced local anesthetic consumption and less motor block. The epidural catheter placed as part of a CSE is more reliable than a catheter placed as part of a conventional epidural. Less breakthrough pain throughout labor is noted and fewer catheters require replacing. Side effects of CSE include greater potential for hypotension and more fetal heart rate abnormalities. CSE is also used for cesarean delivery. The main purpose is to decrease the spinal dose so that spinal-induced hypotension can be reduced. However, reducing the spinal dose requires an epidural catheter to avoid intra-operative pain when surgery is prolonged., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Neuraxial labor analgesia is considered the gold standard technique for analgesia. Ideally, a good neuraxial technique uses dilute local anesthetic solutions to produce effective pain relief with no or minimal motor impairment. Adjuvant drugs that are co-administered with the local anesthetic either epidurally or intrathecally are useful in achieving this goal. The current review focuses on the effectivity and side-effect profile of various commonly used or tested adjuvants., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Loore Cavens and Eva Roofthooft have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique has shown superiority to continuous epidural infusion techniques, with or without patient-controlled epidural analgesia for pain relief, reduced motor block and patient satisfaction. Many institutions still use patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion, and a comparative study between programmed intermittent epidural bolus and patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion has not yet been performed. We performed a randomised, two-centre, double-blind, controlled trial of these two techniques. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain requiring a top-up dose by an anaesthetist. Secondary outcomes included: motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; local anaesthetic consumption; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. We recruited 130 nulliparous women who received initial spinal analgesia, and then epidural analgesia was initiated and maintained with either programmed intermittent epidural bolus or patient-controlled epidural analgesia using ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 µg·ml -1 . The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had a programmed bolus of 10 ml every hour, with on-demand patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses of 5 ml with a 20 min lockout, and the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group had a 5 ml bolus with a 12 min lockout interval; the potential maximum volume per hour was the same in both groups. The patients in the programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had less frequent breakthrough pain compared with the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group, 7 (10.9%) vs. 38 (62.3%; p < 0.0001), respectively. There was a significant difference in motor block (modified Bromage score ≤ 4) frequency between groups, programmed intermittent epidural bolus group 1 (1.6%) vs. patient-controlled epidural analgesia group 8 (13.1%); p = 0.015. The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had greater local anaesthetic consumption with fewer patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. Patient satisfaction scores and obstetric or neonatal outcomes were not different between groups. In conclusion, we found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique using 10 ml programmed boluses and 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses was superior to a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique using 5 ml boluses and no background infusion., (© 2020 Association of Anaesthetists.)

Background: In labour analgesia, the combination of epidural clonidine and neostigmine as adjuvants to local anaesthetics and opioids is under investigation to provide a longer duration of initial spinal analgesia with local anaesthetics and/or opioids., Objectives: To evaluate the quality of analgesia with epidural neostigmine and clonidine, added to initial spinal analgesia, and to test the hypothesis that the incidence of breakthrough pain could be reduced and patient satisfaction improved., Design: Randomised double-blind controlled trial., Setting: University Hospital of Leuven in Belgium., Participants: One hundred healthy, term (≥37 weeks) parturients., Intervention: All patients received initial spinal analgesia with ropivacaine and sufentanil. Fifteen minutes after spinal injection, 10 ml of a solution containing neostigmine 500 μg and clonidine 75 μg, or 10 ml physiological saline alone was injected epidurally. Patient-controlled analgesia with ropivacaine and sufentanil was then made available., Main Outcome Measures: The incidence of breakthrough pain, patient satisfaction and hourly ropivacaine use., Results: Ropivacaine use decreased significantly by 32.6% in the neostigmine/clonidine (NC) group [11.6 ± 4.2 vs. 17.2 ± 5.3 mg h in the NC group and placebo (P) group, respectively] and a significant difference in breakthrough pain was noted; only 3% in group NC had breakthrough pain compared with 36% in group P. Patient satisfaction was better after 1 h in group NC compared with group P (P <0.05) but not different after 24 h (visual analogue scale score 97 ± 5 vs. 88 ± 11 mm after 1 h; 92 ± 10 vs. 90 ± 14 mm after 24 h)., Conclusion: The administration of epidural clonidine and neostigmine as adjuvants, following spinal injection of local anaesthetic, improves the quality of analgesia with less ropivacaine consumption, higher patient satisfaction 1 h after administration and a decrease in breakthrough pain compared to standard combined spinal and epidural analgesia and patient-controlled epidural analgesia with ropivacaine and sufentanil.

Purpose of Review: Obesity is a growing healthcare problem worldwide, which also affects the pregnant population. Obesity occurs with increasing frequency during pregnancy. Obesity increases the maternal, fetal and neonatal risks. Also, the anesthesiologist is confronted with significantly more problems when the parturient is overweight or obese. The present review focuses on the anesthetic implications of obesity in pregnancy., Recent Findings: In recent years, many authors have stressed the consequences of obesity in pregnancy. More pregnancy-associated complications such as preeclampsia occur, and more medical interventions are also required such as operative delivery, when patients are obese compared with the nonobese population. Recent anesthetic evidence also shows that obese parturients are at increased risk of anesthesia-related complications such as failed intubation and aspiration., Summary: Anesthesia-related complications are more frequent in obese parturients. Most authors and opinion leaders agree that regional anesthesia is the preferred technique for Cesarean section in obese patients, and that efforts to place early labor epidural analgesia should be optimized in order to be able to avoid general anesthesia when unplanned Cesarean section is required.