title: A comparison of epidural analgesia with 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor.
abstract: We previously found that the extent of an epidural motor block produced by 0.125% ropivacaine was clinically indistinguishable from 0.125% bupivacaine in laboring patients. By adding fentanyl to the 0. 125% ropivacaine and bupivacaine solutions in an attempt to reduce hourly local anesthetic requirements, we hypothesized that differences in motor block produced by the two drugs may become apparent. Fifty laboring women were randomized to receive either 0. 125% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg/mL or an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with settings of: 6-mL/hr basal rate, 5-mL bolus, 10-min lockout, 30-mL/h dose limit. Analgesia, local anesthetic use, motor block, patient satisfaction, and side effects were assessed until the time of delivery. No differences in verbal pain scores, local anesthetic use, patient satisfaction, or side effects between groups were observed; however, patients administered ropivacaine/fentanyl developed significantly less motor block than patients administered bupivacaine/fentanyl. Ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar labor analgesia with significantly less motor block than an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the PCEA technique remains to be determined.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  By using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique, ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar analgesia with significantly less motor block than a similar concentration of bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique remains to be determined.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: G C
authors.initials: GC
authors.lastname: Meister
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: D'Angelo
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Owen
authors.forename: K E
authors.initials: KE
authors.lastname: Nelson
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Gaver
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000577:Amides / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D015360:Analgesia, Epidural; D016362:Analgesia, Obstetrical; D000701:Analgesics, Opioid / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D000779:Anesthetics, Local / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D002045:Bupivacaine / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D005283:Fentanyl / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D011247:Pregnancy; D000077212:Ropivacaine
chemical_list: D000577:Amides; D000701:Analgesics, Opioid; D000779:Anesthetics, Local; D000077212:Ropivacaine; D005283:Fentanyl; D002045:Bupivacaine