Comparison of Intrathecal Injection of Fentanyl and Sufentanil on the Onset, Duration, and Quality of Analgesia in Labor: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Safety and Efficiency of Low-Dose Spinal Analgesia Compared to Epidural Analgesia in Treatment of Pain during Labour: A Case Control Study

BACKGROUND

The epidural catheter for analgesia has been used for decades and has become the gold standard in pain therapy for pregnant women in labour. However, procedural parameters such as time to pain relief and duration to implementation pose hurdles for patients shortly before delivery. Low-dose spinal analgesia (LDSA) is an alternative procedure that was investigated in the study with regard to patient satisfaction and complication rates compared to epidural catheter.

METHODS

In a retrospective monocentric study, a total of 242 patients receiving low-dose spinal analgesia or epidural catheters were evaluated using propensity score matching. Subjective patient satisfaction as well as complication rates were primarily analysed. We hypothesise that LDSA is a safe procedure and provides a similar level of satisfaction compared with the epidural catheter. For this purpose, both procedures were performed according to in-house standards and the patients were interviewed afterwards. Patients who required surgical delivery were excluded to prevent bias.

RESULTS

The LDSA was rated on average as very good [1.09 ± 0.311 vs. 1.07 ± 0.431] in terms of satisfaction by the patients compared to the epidural catheter without showing a significant difference (p = 0.653). Complications were in the low single-digit non-significant range for both procedures [6 (5%) vs. 7 (6%); p = 0.776]. The evaluation showed more perineal tears I° and II° in the low-dose spinal analgesia group [I°: 28 (23%) vs. 3 (2%); p < 0.001-II°: 30 (25%) vs. 2 (2%); p < 0.001]. Neonatal parameters differed significantly only in umbilical cord base excess and umbilical cord venous pH [-5.40 vs. -6.40; p = 0.005].

CONCLUSIONS

LDSA represents a low complication procedure for patients at the end of labour with a high satisfaction level. With the LDSA in the repertoire of pain relief during childbirth, it is possible to also achieve pain reduction for women with deliveries of high velocity without compromising patient satisfaction or perinatal morbidity.

Post-cesarean Delivery Analgesia Using Spinal Anesthesia: Ropivacaine-Fentanyl vs. Ropivacaine-Sufentanil

Background

To improve the quality of intraoperative and postoperative analgesia during spinal anesthesia, intrathecal opioids are used as adjuvant drugs in combination with local anesthetics.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the intrathecal injection of ropivacaine-fentanyl with ropivacaine-sufentanil in terms of the duration of analgesia after cesarean section (CS).

Methods

This randomized, double-blind clinical trial study was conducted on women referred to Imam Khomeini Hospital of Ahvaz City for elective CS in 2021. A total of 51 patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. The first group (n = 25) received ropivacaine (17.5 mg) + fentanyl (25 μg), while the second group (n = 26) received ropivacaine (17.5 mg) + sufentanil (2.5 μg) for spinal anesthesia. Eventually, several parameters were investigated, including the duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia (based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS)), hemodynamic parameters, and possible complications.

Results

The duration of surgery (P = 0.059) and the duration of motor block (P = 0.962) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The mean duration of analgesia (from the time of entering recovery to reaching VAS = 3) was 203.12 ± 72.93 and 207.46 ± 69.59 minutes in the fentanyl and sufentanil groups, respectively (P = 0.658). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) drops in minute 5 were observed more frequently in the sufentanil group than in the fentanyl group (P = 0.027 and P = 0.002, respectively). At the other time points, however, no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of hemodynamic variables (P > 0.05). Finally, the frequency of pruritus was higher in the sufentanil group than in the fentanyl group (26.9% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.024).

Conclusions

Adding fentanyl or sufentanil to intrathecal ropivacaine provides a similar duration of analgesia. However, fentanyl was associated with better hemodynamic stability and a lower incidence of pruritus.

Comparison of the Effect of Intravenous Bolus Norepinephrine and Ephedrine on Prevention of Post Spinal Hypotension in Cesarean Section: a Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Background:Currently, cesarean section is performed under spinal anesthesia. Hypotension is the most common complication of spinal anesthesia. This study aimed to compare the effect of intravenous bolus norepinephrine and ephedrine on prevention of post spinal hypotension in cesarean section. Methods:The present study was a double-blind clinical trial, in which 50 pregnant women aged 18-46 years, with ASA class I and II, were selected for cesarean section under spinal anesthesia and randomly assigned to two groups, one receiving norepinephrine (group A) and the other one ephedrine (group B). Immediately after spinal anesthesia, patients in group A received 5 μg of intravenous norepinephrine and those in group B 10 mg of intravenous ephedrine. The incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and mean heart rate were recorded in a checklist. Patients with hypotension and bradycardia received 10 mg of ephedrine and 0.5 mg of atropine, respectively, and finally the amount of ephedrine and atropine was also recorded. Data were analyzed in SPSS, version 21 at a confidence level of 95%. Results:Hypotension had a frequency of 24% and 40% (P = 0.364) and the dose of ephedrine used to treat that condition was 15.0±8.37 and 18.18±7.51 mg (P = 0.434) in the norepinephrine and ephedrine groups, respectively. The mean heart rate was significantly lower in the norepinephrine group than the ephedrine one (P <0.001). Conclusion:Both norepinephrine and ephedrine were effective in preventing hypotension during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, but tachycardia was less common with norepinephrine. Trial registration: The present study was registered on 17 May 2019 in the Iranian Clinical Trial Center (https://www.irct.ir) Identifier: IRCT20120915010841N17.

Anesthetic Conversion of Preexisting Labor Epidural Analgesia for Emergency Cesarean Section and Efficacy of Levobupivacaine with or Without Magnesium Sulphate: A Prospective Randomized Study

Background: For pregnant women who require an emergency cesarean section (CS), extending labor epidural analgesia as quickly as feasible to good quality anesthesia is a critical issue. This indicates the presence of functional labor epidural analgesia and reduces the need for general anesthesia. Addition of magnesium increases anesthetic and analgesic qualities of epidural anesthesia. Objectives: The purpose of this trial was to assess the role of adding magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) with levobupivacaine to speed up the conversion of labor epidural analgesia into enough anesthesia for emergency CS. Methods: Fifty parturients were randomly assigned to receive 19.5 mL of levobupivacaine 0.5% with either 0.5 mL of normal saline 0.9% (Group I) or 0.5 mL of MgSO4 10% (Group II) after receiving labor epidural analgesia. We documented the onset of block (loss of pinprick to T6), number of patients needing additional analgesia, the time needed for sensory and motor blockade to recover, and the adverse effects. Results: The frequency of patients receiving intraoperative supplements was comparable in the study groups (P = 0.491), although the onset of the block was faster in Group II than in Group I (P = 0.000*). Group II took substantially longer to recover from sensory and motor blockade than Group I (P = 0.001* and P = 0.001*, respectively). In both groups, the occurrence of adverse events was similar. Conclusions: Adding 50 mg of MgSO4 to levobupivacaine 0.5% accelerated the epidural top, and both sensory onset and motor blocks period were prolonged as compared to levobupivacaine alone when extending epidural analgesia for emergency CS.

The Influence of Analgesic Modalities on Postoperative Cancer Recurrence

The potential for cancer cells to grow and to metastasize depends on complex interactions between inflammatory signals and pathways, immune cells, and elements of the stromal tissue in which they invade. Related to the nature of many cancers, the probability of recurrence can potentially be quite high for some patients. Immunology, lifestyle modifications, timing of disease, genetics, age, gender, and race are only a handful of ways the likelihood of cancer recurrence can be influenced. The quantity, or density, of certain immunological cells or factors, plays a role in the propagation of cancer cells. Opioids are often used in cancer patients for acute postoperative and chronic pain management. While they can produce significant pain relief, the type of analgesic utilized is important, as it may influence cancer propagation. In this regard, certain opioids have been found to increase T regulatory cells while suppressing NK cell function. Morphine may promote tumor neovascularization and expansion. Fentanyl administration significantly diminishes NK-cells and CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells. In a recent meta-analysis, propofol-based anesthesia improved both cancer-free survival and overall survival. COX inhibitors have also shown promise in persevering cancer immune function, as in literature involving ketorolac and celecoxib. In summary, inhaled anesthesia and opioids may contribute to a pro-tumor metastasis environment also known as cancer propagation; whereas propofol and COX inhibitors may provide a better alternative to reduce cancer recurrence and propagation.

Full Opioid Agonists and Tramadol: Pharmacological and Clinical Considerations

Opioids are mu receptor agonists and have been an important part of pain treatment for thousands of years. In order to use these drugs appropriately and successfully in patients, whether to control pain, to treat opiate-induced side effects, or opiate withdrawal syndromes, a solid understanding of the pharmacology of such drugs is crucial. The most recognized full agonist opioids are heroin, morphine, codeine, oxycodone, meperidine, and fentanyl. Phenanthrenes refer to a naturally occurring plant-based compound that includes three or more fused rings. The opioids derived from the opium plant are phenanthrene derivatives, whereas most synthetic opioids are simpler molecules that do not have multiple rings. Methadone acts as a synthetic opioid analgesic similar to morphine in both quality and quantity; however, methadone lasts longer and in oral form, has higher efficacy, and is considered a diphenylheptane. Fentanyl is a strong synthetic phenylpiperdine derivative that exhibits activity as a mu-selective opioid agonist approximately 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine. Meperidine is another medication which is a phenylpiperdine. Tramadol is considered a mixed-mechanism opioid drug, as it is a centrally acting analgesic that exerts its effects via binding mu receptors and blocking the reuptake of monoamines. Some of the most common adverse effects shared among all opioids are nausea, vomiting, pruritus, addiction, respiratory depression, constipation, sphincter of Oddi spasm, and miosis (except in the case of meperidine). Chronic opioid usage has also established a relationship to opioid-induced hypogonadism and adrenal suppression. Physicians must be stewards of opioid use and use opioids only when necessary.

Comparison of Spinal Versus Epidural Analgesia for Vaginal Delivery: A Randomized Double Blinded Clinical Trial

Background

Recently, one of the problems in developing countries is pregnant women who insist on cesarean section for fear of painful vaginal delivery. There are various methods to reduce labor pain, including medical and non-medical methods. Neuraxial analgesia is classified as one of the best ways to reduce labor pain. Epidural analgesia is a classic and popular procedure to decrease labor pain. Nevertheless, other methods, such as spinal or combined spinal-epidural analgesia, is more effective compared with the epidural.

Objectives

In this study, we investigated a single intrathecal versus epidural injection in pregnant women during childbirth.

Methods

In our research, after obtaining informed consent, the patients were randomly assigned to two equal groups: epidural and spinal. Each group contained 50 parturient women in advanced labor. In the epidural group, 2.5 mL isobaric bupivacaine 0.5%, sufentanil (0.2 mcg/mL), and 7 mL saline 0.9% were injected by an 18-gauge Tuohy needle at the L4-5 or L5-S1 intervertebral space, and in the spinal group, 0.5 mL isobaric bupivacaine 0.5%, 2.5 mcg sufentanil, and 0.5 mL saline 0.9% were injected by a 25-gauge pencil-point Quincke needle at the L4-5 or L5-S1 intervertebral spaces. For pain intensity, the visual analog scale (VAS) was used at serial intervals, and other variables, such as the onset and duration of analgesia, hypotension, neonatal APGAR score, fetal heart rate (FHR) changes, and other variables were examined.

Results

The mean time to onset analgesic effect was 4.6 min in the spinal group compared with 12.5 minutes in the epidural (P < 0.001). Duration of analgesia was 121 minutes in the spinal group compared with 104 min in the epidural group (P < 0.001). The time to reach the maximum block was 8.4 min in the spinal group vs. 22.2 min in the epidural group (P < 0.001). The duration of the second and third gestation stages was the same in both groups.

Conclusions

Spinal analgesia is short and easy to perform and does not require advanced equipment and technical experience. Spinal analgesia can be a good option for labor analgesia and leads to achieving a lower pain score than epidural analgesia.

Comparative Study of Effect of Spinal Anesthesia in Sitting and Lateral Positions on the Onset Time of Sensory Block and Hemodynamic Condition in Cesarean Section: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Spinal anesthesia is the method of choice for the cesarean section. Hypotension is a common complication of this method.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the effect of spinal anesthesia in the sitting and lateral positions on the onset time of sensory block and hemodynamic condition in cesarean sections.

METHODS

In this clinical trial, 106 elective cesarean section candidates under spinal anesthesia were selected and randomly divided into two groups: spinal anesthesia in the sitting position (group S) and the lateral position (group L). The onset time of the sensory block, quality of sensory and motor block, hemodynamic condition, frequency of hypotension, nausea, and vomiting, and the doses of ephedrine and atropine were compared between both groups. Data were analyzed with SPSS version 16 software at a 95% confidence level.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age. The frequency of hypotension in L and S groups was 24.5% and 57.7%, respectively (P = 0.001), in minute 6 after spinal anesthesia and 5.7% and 36.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), in minute 8 after spinal anesthesia. The mean time to reach the sensory level of T6 was 1.30 ± 0.43 min versus 4.54 ± 2.12 min (P < 0.001), motor block score in minute 5 was 2.98 ± 0.14 versus 2.82 (P = 0.044), and ephedrine dose was 11.5 mg and 16.92 mg in the L and S groups, respectively (P = 0.010). The maximum sensory-motor block and satisfaction of women with spinal anesthesia were significantly higher in the lateral position than in the sitting position (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Cesarean sections under spinal anesthesia in the lateral position than in the sitting position lead to a more rapid sensory and motor block, reduced ephedrine consumption, and enhanced satisfaction of women.