patient controlled epidural analgesia for labor n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 21

Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor. Obstetric Anesthesiology(Anesth Analg 2009;108:921–8) R2 한 진 희. patient-controlled epidural analgesia(PCEA) for labor : Gambling et al.1 in 1988

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Presentation Transcript
    1. Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labor Obstetric Anesthesiology(Anesth Analg 2009;108:921–8) R2 한 진 희

    2. patient-controlled epidural analgesia(PCEA) for labor : Gambling et al.1 in 1988 • PCEA vs continuous epidural infusion (CEI) 1. analgesia : similar 2. PCEA reduces the incidence of unscheduled clinician interventions 3. total dose of local anesthetic 감소 4. reduces the incidence of lower extremity motor block 5. no clinically significant impact on obstetric or neonatal outcomes

    3. Clinical research has focused on refining PCEA techniques 1. further improve analgesia 2. reduce motor block 3. increase maternal satisfaction 4. reducing the frequency of unscheduled clinician interventions 1) Should a background infusion be used? 2) Is ropivacaine superior to bupivacaine when used for PCEA in labor? 3) Can the volume of the PCEA bolus dose and lockout interval be manipulated to optimize analgesia? 4) What is the impact of new techniques and technologies on current PCEA practice?

    4. THE USE OF BACKGROUND INFUSION • seven studies : PCEA with and without background infusions • the infusion rates : quite low, with most <5 mL/h. • one study found a difference in analgesia: : without a background infusion  a higher incidence of intense pain (>4/10) • all of these studies : Significant motor block was uncommon • Two studies : more clinician interventions in the no infusion group. • One study : more local anesthetic in the no infusion group • maternal satisfaction : no differences

    5. summary • background infusion 1. reduces the incidence of unscheduled clinician interventions 2. improve patient analgesia 3. no increase in motor block associated with the background infusion.

    6. ROPIVACAINE VS BUPIVACAINE • 11 studies • wide range of PCEA settings. Bupivacaine : 0.05% ~ 0.125%. Ropivacaine : 0.05% ~ 0.20%. • Two studies : used different concentrations  reflect differences in potency • five studies : bupivacaine  increased incidence of motor block : However, most studies did not account for relative differences in potency between ropivacaine and bupivacaine • Halpern et al : Maternal satisfaction : mobility - ropivacaine group : analgesia at delivery - bupivacaine group • Fischer et al. : relief of contraction and delivery pain in bupivacaine

    7. Summary • both ropivacaine and bupivacaine : well suited for PCEA in labor. • an increased incidence of motor block in bupivacaine • but this difference may not be clinically significant, particularly for short labors. • Flexibility in the PCEA settings may offset any advantage that drug selection may have.

    8. BOLUS DOSE VOLUME AND LOCKOUT INTERVAL • Six studies : compared various PCEA settings : try to determine the ideal bolus dose and corresponding lockout time interval • Analgesia, maternal satisfaction, motor block, and clinician rescue boluses were reported in all of the studies. • bupivacaine (0.0625%–0.125%) and ropivacaine (0.1%–0.2%) with fentanyl or sufentanil. • Bolus volumes ( 2 ~ 20 mL ) , lockout intervals (5 ~ 30 min)

    9. Three studies used a background infusion • Bernardet al: Group 1: bolus 4 mL, lockout 8 min Group 2: bolus 12 mL, lockout 25 min : Significantly better analgesia in Group 2 • All study : no significant difference in unscheduled clinician interventions : Significant motor block was uncommon : no reports of toxicity or increased side effects with the larger bolus volumes

    10. Summary • no ideal bolus dose or lockout interval setting for labor PCEA • Large bolus doses of dilute local anesthetic  superior analgesia and maternal satisfaction

    11. DRUG CONCENTRATION • Six studies • three studies : The more concentrated solution groups  significantly greater motor block • Two studies : less pruritus with local anesthetic without opioids • use of dilute local anesthetic solutions with opioids for labor PCEA  less local anesthetic consumption  less motor block without compromising labor analgesia • more dilute solutions also used larger volumes  improve analgesia  more uniform anesthetic spread in the epidural space • addition of lipophilic opioids to local anesthetics reduction in the minimum local analgesic concentration of bupivacaine improves the quality of analgesia • but, lipophilic opioids dose dependent pruritus

    12. summary • labor PCEA : dilute local anesthetic solutions should be used. • The use of 0.25% bupivacaine and 0.2% ropivacaine : increased incidence of motor blockade without concomitant increases maternal analgesia or satisfaction. • avoid excessive pruritus  The lowest, clinically effective, concentration of lipophilic opioid should be added

    13. FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS Computer-Integrated PCEA • automatically adjusts the background infusion rate based on the number of PCEA demands • adjusts the background infusion to 5, 10, or 15 mL/h If the patient require one, two, or three demand boluses • decreases the background infusion by increments of 5 mL/h if there are no bolus demands in the previous hour • improve efficacy while minimizing increases in local anesthetic use-associated background infusions • had similar local anesthetic consumption compared with demand-only PCEA but was associated with increased maternal satisfaction • not currently commercially available

    14. Programmed Intermittent Mandatory Epidural Boluses (PIEB) • Same total hourly amount of local anesthetic is administered as intermittent boluses (e.g., two boluses of 6mL every 30 min vs 12 mL/h CEI) • more effective for labor analgesia -similar analgesia -higher maternal satisfaction -less need for unscheduled clinician rescue boluses • the local anesthetic-sparing effect of PIEB  more uniform epidural spread of local anesthetics when large volumes of local anesthetic • reduced consumption of ropivacaine and less PCEA demand boluses while maintaining similar analgesic efficacy • currently not available

    15. Disposable Epidural PCEA • simple disposable PCEA vs standard electronic PCEA device • no significant differences in analgesic efficacy, maternal satisfaction, local anesthetic use, or side effects • less bulky, may facilitate ambulation during labor • disadvantages : the lack of programmability and potentially increased costs.

    16. SUMMARY • PCEA-reliable and effective method • Low concentrations of bupivacaine or ropivacaine with opioids  excellent analgesia • using dilute local anesthetic solutions (up to 0.125% bupivacaine or 0.2% ropivacaine)  Motor block can be minimized • Background infusion  reduces the need for unscheduled clinician interventions  better analgesia • Background infusion rates ( 2 ~ 10 mL/h) : effectively • no ideal bolus dose or lockout interval setting for labor PCEA • Larger bolus doses (more than 5 mL) of dilute local anesthetic : superior analgesia