Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dresner, M.
Right arrow Articles by Bamber, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dresner, M.
Right arrow Articles by Bamber, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2000, Vol. 85, No. 6 826-829
© 2000 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Ropivacaine 0.2% versus bupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl: a double blind comparison for analgesia during labour

M. Dresner, J. Freeman, C. Calow, A. Quinn and J. Bamber

Department of Anaesthetics, Leeds General Infirmary, Great George Street, Leeds LS1 3EX, UK*Corresponding author

We have performed a randomized, double-blind comparison of two epidural drug regimens for analgesia in labour. In the bupivacaine group (BUPIV), 101 healthy parturients received 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 µg ml–1. In the ropivacaine group (ROPIV), 102 women received 0.2% ropivacaine. Both groups received an initial loading dose of 15 ml, a continuous infusion of 8 ml h–1, and top-ups of 10 ml. Breakthrough pain not responding to a routine top-up was treated with an ‘escape’ top-up of 10 ml 0.25% bupivacaine. The two groups were compared for complete analgesia at 30 min, routine and ‘escape’ top-up requirements, midwife assessment of analgesic efficacy, delivery mode, patient visual analogue scores (VAS) for first and second stage analgesia, overall satisfaction, and patient assessment of motor blockade. Patients receiving ropivacaine received fewer routine top-ups (median 1.0 vs. 2.0, P=0.001) and fewer escape top-ups (9.8% vs. 21.8%, P=0.02). The ropivacaine group was more likely to be pain free in the first stage (51% vs. 33.7%, P=0.01). There were no significant differences in patients’ assessment of motor block or mode of delivery between the groups. Pain relief and satisfaction scores from midwives and patients were consistently better in the ropivacaine group, but did not reach statistical significance.

Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 826–9


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
B. B. Lee, W. D. Ngan Kee, F. F. Ng, T. K. Lau, and E. L. Y. Wong
Epidural Infusions of Ropivacaine and Bupivacaine for Labor Analgesia: A Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Obstetric Outcome
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2004; 98(4): 1145 - 1152.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
J.-M. Bernard, D. Le Roux, and J. Frouin
Ropivacaine and Fentanyl Concentrations in Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia During Labor: A Volume-Range Study
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2003; 97(6): 1800 - 1807.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.