Effects of early- and late- neuraxial analgesia on multiparous women: a retrospective monocentric study

BACKGROUND

The mechanism underlying maternal fever and prolonged labor progression associated with neuraxial analgesia (NA) remains elusive, raising concerns among certain pregnant women regarding the application of NA during vaginal delivery. This study aimed to investigate the impact of early and late NA on maternal and neonatal outcomes in multiparous women.

METHODS

This retrospective study collected data from 1119 multiparous women with singleton pregnancies, full term and live births at our labor and delivery center between August 1st, 2021 and July 31st, 2022. Based on the timing of NA initiation, participants were categorized into three groups: no-NA, early-NA and late-NA. The no-NA group comprised of 172 women who did not receive NA during vaginal delivery; the early-NA group included 603 women in which NA was initiated when cervical dilation was between 0.5 and 2.0 cm; and the late-NA group comprising 344 cases in which NA was initiated at the cervical dilation of ≥ 2 cm. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were observed, including durations of the first, second, third and total stage of labor, the rate of intrapartum cesarean delivery (CD), intrapartum fever, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), meconium-stained amniotic fluid, and neonatal Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min.

RESULTS

No differences were noted in the maternal age, body mass index (BMI) on admission, gestations, parity, gestational weeks at delivery and neonatal birth weight, or the rate of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and hypertension disorder did not significantly differ among the three groups (p > 0.05). The no-NA group had shorter durations of first stage, second stage of labor compared to the early-NA or late-NA group (median, 215.0 min and 10.0 min vs. 300.0 min and 12.0 min vs. 280.0 min and 13.0 min) (p < 0.05), but no differences were observed between the early-NA and late-NA group (p > 0.05). There were no differences in the rate of intrapartum CD, intrapartum fever, PPH, maternal transferred to ICU, neonatal transfer to NICU, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, and postpartum stay ≥ 7d, as well as the neonatal the Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min among the three groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

NA is associated with extended durations of the first, second and total stages of labor. However, the early initiation of NA in multiparous women (cervical dilation within 0.5-2.0 cm) does not increase the risk of intrapartum CD or intrapartum fever. These findings endorse the secure utilization of early NA for pain relief during labor in multiparous women.

Construction of a nomogram model for predicting infectious intrapartum fever

OBJECTIVES

To investigate influencing factors of intrapartum fever during vaginal delivery and to construct a prediction model for infectious intrapartum fever.

METHODS

A total of 444 patients with intrapartum fever admitted in Ningbo Women and Children's Hospital from January 2020 to December 2021 were enrolled. The clinical data and laboratory findings were compared between patients with infectious intrapartum fever and non-infectious intrapartum fever, and the factors associated with intrapartum fever were analyzed with a multivariate logistic regression model. A prediction nomogram model was constructed based on the factors of intrapartum fever and its predictive efficiency was evaluated by correction curve and receiver operator characteristic curve.

RESULTS

In the 444 cases, 182 (41.0%) had definite intrauterine infection and 262 (59.0%) had no infectious intrapartum fever. Univariate analysis showed that the length of hospital stay before induced labor, the time of induced abortion, misoprostol administration, autoimmune diseases, white blood cell count (WBC) and hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels were significantly different between the two groups (all P<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that misoprostol administration and autoimmune diseases were protective factors (OR=0.31 and 0.36, both P<0.05) for infectious intrapartum fever, while high WBC and hs-CRP were risk factors (OR=1.20 and 1.09, both P<0.05). The area under the curve of nomogram model for predicting infectious intrapartum fever was 0.823, and the calibration curve validation showed that the predicted and measured values were in general agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple factors cause intrapartum fever. The nomogram model constructed in this study has good predictive accuracy for infectious intrapartum fever.

Retrospective study of intrapartum fever in term pregnancies and adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes

Background

Intrapartum fever is a well-known predisposing factor for severe perinatal outcomes. Herein, we explored the intrapartum features, obstetric outcomes, and neonatal outcomes in relation to the extent of intrapartum fever via three group analyses.

Methods

A retrospective cohort analysis consisting of 575 term, singleton live births in one medical center from January 1st to December 31st, 2020 was carried out. Parturients who had experienced a maximal intrapartum fever of <38.0 °C were compared with two sub-groups of parturients who had experienced respective maximal fevers of 38.0-38.9 °C and ≥39.0 °C. We computed the adjusted risks for adverse perinatal outcomes via multiple logistic regression models to control for confounders.

Results

There were statistically remarkable differences among the three groups in 13 items including body mass index, epidural, and WBC before delivery (p < 0.05). In contrast with intrapartum fevers of 37.5-37.9 °C, intrapartum fevers of 38.0-38.9 °C were linked to an elevated risk of neonatal sepsis and neonatal intensive care unit admission with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.28 (95% CI 2.162-8.479) and 1.73 (95% CI 1.125-2.666), nonetheless, the relationship was remarkably higher for intrapartum fever ≥39.0 °C, with an OR of 6.40 (95% CI 2.450-16.725) and 2.23 (95% CI 1.021-4.854). Additionally, intrapartum fevers of 38.0-38.9 °C and ≥39.0 °C were related to remarkably higher risk for operative deliveries (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.373-3.648; OR 3.59, 95% CI 1.398-9.226; respectively) and histological chorioamnionitis (OR 3.77, 95% CI 2.261-6.271; OR 19.24, 95% CI 7.385-50.111, respectively).

Conclusions

Intrapartum fever is an important indicator of adverse perinatal outcomes. The higher the temperature, the higher risk of histological chorioamnionitis, as well as the risk of neonatal sepsis and neonatal intensive care unit admission.

Nomogram for perinatal prediction of intrapartum fever: a retrospective case-control study

Objective

To explore the risk factors for intrapartum fever and to develop a nomogram to predict the incidence of intrapartum fever.

Methods

The general demographic characteristics and perinatal factors of 696 parturients who underwent vaginal birth at the Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University from May 2019 to April 2020 were retrospectively analysed. Data was collected from May 2019 to October 2019 on 487 pregnant women who formed a training cohort. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify the independent risk factors associated with intrapartum fever during vaginal birth, and a nomogram was developed to predict the occurrence. To verify the nomogram, data was collected from January 2020 to April in 2020 from 209 pregnant women who formed a validation cohort.

Results

The incidence of intrapartum fever in the training cohort was found in 72 of the 487 parturients (14.8%), and the incidence of intrapartum fever in the validation cohort was 31 of the 209 parturients (14.8%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the following factors were significantly related to intrapartum fever: primiparas (odds ratio [OR] 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15–5.15), epidural labour analgesia (OR 2.89; 95% CI 1.23–6.82), premature rupture of membranes (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.13–4.95), second stage of labour ≥ 120 min (OR 4.36; 95% CI 1.42–13.41), amniotic fluid pollution degree III (OR 10.39; 95% CI 3.30–32.73), and foetal weight ≥ 4000 g (OR 7.49; 95% CI 2.12–26.54). Based on clinical experience and previous studies, the duration of epidural labour analgesia also appeared to be a meaningful factor for intrapartum fever; therefore, these seven variables were used to develop a nomogram to predict intrapartum fever in parturients. The nomogram achieved a good area under the ROC curve of 0.86 and 0.81 in the training and in the validation cohorts, respectively. Additionally, the nomogram had a well-fitted calibration curve, which also showed excellent diagnostic performance.

Conclusion

We constructed a model to predict the occurrence of fever during childbirth and developed an accessible nomogram to help doctors assess the risk of fever during childbirth. Such assessment may be helpful in implementing reasonable treatment measures.

Trial registration

Clinical Trial Registration: (www.chictr.org.cnChiCTR2000035593)

Epidural Dexmedetomidine for Prevention of Intrapartum Fever During Labor Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Intrapartum fever occurs frequently during labor. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of epidural dexmedetomidine on maternal temperature, pain score and adverse effects during labor analgesia.

METHODS

A total of 600 full-term primiparous parturients were randomly divided into two groups. The dexmedetomidine group (Group Dex, n = 300) received 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.5 µg/mL dexmedetomidine for epidural analgesia during labor, while the control group (Group C, n = 300) received 0.1% ropivacaine alone. The maternal temperature, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Ramsay sedation score (RSS) were recorded, and the systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR) were monitored. Side effects, if any, were also recorded.

RESULTS

The incidence of intrapartum fever was lower in Group Dex than in Group C (4.1% vs. 8.7%, χ2 = 5.07, P = 0.024). VAS values from the time of 3 cm cervical dilatation to 10 cm cervical dilatation were also lower in Group Dex than in Group C (1.0 ± 0.9 vs. 1.3 ± 0.7, t = 3.62, P < 0.001; 2.8 ± 0.8 vs. 3.3 ± 0.8, t = 8.09, P < 0.001; 3.1 ± 0.9 vs. 3.3 ± 0.8, t = 3.88, P < 0.001; 3.6 ± 0.8 vs. 4.1 ± 1.0, t = 5.86, P < 0.001, respectively). HR from the time of 3 cm cervical dilatation to 10 cm cervical dilatation was lower during labor in Group Dex than in Group C (80.0 ± 4.3 vs. 83.1 ± 5.4 beats/min, t = 7.58, P < 0.001; 81.1 ± 4.0 vs. 83.7 ± 5.5 beats/min, t = 6.48, P < 0.001; 78.9 ± 5.4 vs. 81.5 ± 6.3 beats/min, t = 5.41, P < 0.001; 83.1 ± 5.3 vs. 84.8 ± 5.6 beats/min, t = 3.75, P < 0.001, respectively), while SBP and DBP were similar between the two groups. The incidence of adverse events during labor was also similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that dexmedetomidine could reduce the incidence of intrapartum fever and relieve pain during labor without increasing adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR-OPC-16008548.

Is it safe to perform amnioinfusion in the presence of suspected intraamniotic infection?

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of amnioinfusion in the presence of suspected intra-amniotic infections (SII) on maternal outcomes among women delivering at term.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary medical center. All consecutive singleton term deliveries with SII during 2011-2019 were included. Cases where amnioinfusion was performed after the diagnosis of SII were compared to cases without amnioinfusion, matched by cervical dilation at diagnosis of SII. Maternal and obstetric adverse outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

After matching for cervical dilation at diagnosis of SII, the study cohort included 786 women: 62 (7.9%) women in the amnioinfusion group and 724 (92.1%) in the control group. A composite of adverse maternal outcomes occurred in 106 (13.5%) deliveries. There were no significant differences in the rates of maternal adverse outcomes between the amnioinfusion and control groups (11.0% vs 13.7%, respectively; P=0.59), including postpartum endometritis (5.0% vs 3.3%, respectively; P=0.46) and febrile morbidity (10.0% vs 6.5%, respectively; P=0.42). Neonatal blood gas outcomes and Apgar scores did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

The use of amnioinfusion for alleviating non-reassuring fetal heart rate in the presence of SII is safe and does not increase the rate of maternal adverse outcome.

The correlation between the number of vaginal examinations during active labor and febrile morbidity, a retrospective cohort study

Background

The association between the number of vaginal examinations (VEs) performed during labor and the risk of infection is unclear. The literature regarding this issue is not consensual, and the available studies are relatively small. Therefore, we aimed to study the association between the number of VEs during labor, and maternal febrile morbidity, in a very large cohort.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study. All women who delivered vaginally ≥37 weeks, at our institute, between 2008 and 2017 were included. Patients who underwent cesarean delivery or who were treated with prophylactic antibiotics, or had a fever ≥38.0 °C prior to the first VE were excluded. Cases of intrauterine fetal death, known malformations, or missing data were excluded as well. The cohort was divided according to the number of VEs performed: up to 4 VEs (n = 9716), 5–6 VEs (n = 4624), 7–8 VEs (n = 2999), and 9 or more VEs (n = 4844). The rates of intrapartum febrile morbidity (intrapartum fever and chorioamnionitis), postpartum febrile morbidity (postpartum fever and endometritis), and peripartum febrile morbidity (any of the mentioned complications) were compared.

Results

Overall, 22,183 women were included in the study. On multivariate analysis, we found that performing 5 VEs or more during labor was independently associated with intrapartum febrile morbidity (5–6 VEs: aOR = 1.83, 95% CI (1.29–2.61), 7–8 VEs: aOR = 2.65 95% CI (1.87–3.76), 9 or more VEs aOR = 3.47 95% CI (2.44–4.92)), postpartum febrile morbidity (5–6 VEs: aOR = 1.29, 95% CI (1.09–1.86), 7–8 VEs: aOR = 1.94 95% CI (1.33–2.83), 9 or more VEs aOR = 1.91 95% CI (1.28–2.82)), and peripartum morbidity (5–6 VEs: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI (1.15–1.91), 7–8 VEs: aOR = 2.15 95% CI (1.66–2.78), 9 or more VEs: aOR = 2.57 95% CI (1.97–3.34)).

Conclusion

The number of VEs performed during labor is directly correlated with febrile morbidity. Performing five or more VEs during labor is independently associated with febrile morbidity; For intrapartum and peripartum febrile morbidity the risk rises as more VEs are performed.

The association between epidural labor analgesia and maternal fever

The association between epidural labor analgesia and maternal fever is complex and controversial. Observational, retrospective, before-and-after, and randomized controlled trials all support the association, with the most current evidence supporting the mechanistic involvement of noninfectious inflammation. Considering the clinically significant neonatal consequences that have been previously demonstrated, and the possibility of more common subclinical fetal brain injury that animal models imply, the avoidance of maternal fever during labor is imperative. With the current popularity of epidural analgesia in labor, it is important that clinicians delineate how epidurals cause maternal fever and how to block the noninfectious inflammatory response that seems to warm a subset of women laboring with epidurals.