Optimum interval time of programmed intermittent epidural bolus of ropivacaine 0.08% with sufentanyl 0.3 μg/mL for labor analgesia: a biased-coin up-and-down sequential allocation trial

An Innovative Approach to Determine Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus Pump Settings for Labor Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Three settings are required on a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) pump for labor analgesia: the PIEB next bolus (PIEBnb), PIEB interval (PIEBi), and PIEB volume (PIEBv). The ideal settings for these parameters are still unknown. We hypothesized a mathematical modeling tool, response surface methodology (RSM), could estimate 3 PIEB pump parameters while balancing 3 clinically important patient outcomes simultaneously. The study objective was to use RSM to estimate PIEB settings (PIEBnb, PIEBi, and PIEBv) while maximizing maternal satisfaction, minimizing the need for clinician-administered boluses, and optimizing the ratio of delivered/requested patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) boluses simultaneously.

METHODS

With institutional ethics approval, a double-blind randomized trial was completed in a tertiary care labor and delivery center. Nulliparous, English-speaking American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II patients aged 18 to 45 years at full term, single gestation in vertex presentation, in spontaneous labor and ≤7 cm cervical dilation were included. Patients with comorbidities, contraindications to neuraxial analgesia, using chronic analgesics, <152 cm, or body mass index (BMI) >45 kg/m 2 were excluded. After informed consent, labor analgesia was initiated using 10 mL ropivacaine 0.2% with 10 µg/mL fentanyl solution and PCEA (volume 6 mL every 10 minutes). Patients were randomized to predetermined PIEB settings. RSM identified 3 pump settings that represented a stationary point that best maximized or minimized 3 outcomes simultaneously: PCEA ratio (a ratio closest to 1), clinician bolus (optimal is 0), and maternal satisfaction (visual analog scale, 0-100, ideal response is ≥90).

RESULTS

Of 287 potential participants, 192 did not meet inclusion criteria or declined to participate, and 26 were withdrawn, leaving 69 patients for study inclusion. Using RSM, the suggested PIEB settings for all the primary study outcomes were as follows: PIEBnb = 29.4 minutes, PIEBi = 59.8 minutes, and PIEBv = 6.2 mL. These PIEB settings corresponded to the following clinical outcomes: maternal satisfaction at 93.9%, PCEA ratio at 0.77, and need for clinician bolus at 0.29. The dermatome sensory score was between T10 and T5 in 89% of the patients. The median lowest Bromage score was 4.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel study used a mathematical model to estimate PIEB pump settings while simultaneously maximizing 3 clinical outcomes. Equally weighted clinical outcomes prevent maximal outcome optimization and may not reflect patient priorities. Future studies or quality improvement endeavors could use RSM methodology to estimate PIEB pump settings targeting optimal values for a single clinical outcome of determined importance to parturients.

90% effective volume of 0.1% ropivacaine combined with 0.4 µg/ml sufentanil for epidural labour analgesia with push pump at a rate of 400 mL/hr and a bolus interval of 30 min: a double-blind sequential dose-finding study

BACKGROUND

It was reported that either shorter programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) intervals or high-speed bolus can produce more extensive epidural spread. We hypothesized that a combination of shortened time interval and increased speed of epidural bolus might further improve analgesic effect and therefore reduce the hourly volume for epidural labour analgesia.

METHODS

This double-blind dose-finding study used a biased coin up-and-down sequential allocation method to determine the 90% effective bolus volume of ropivacaine combined with sufentanil while using the push pump at a rate of 400 mL/hr and interval of 30 min to provide effective analgesia without breakthrough pain. We used 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.4 µg/mL sufentanil, with bolus volumes ranging from 3 to 6 mL. The first patient was assigned a volume of 3 mL, and the remaining volumes were assigned according to the biased coin-up-and-down method.

RESULTS

The estimated 90% effective volume (EV90) of ropivacaine combined with sufentanil for epidural labour analgesia at a time interval of 30 min was 4.88 mL (95% confidence interval 4.83-5.38).

CONCLUSIONS

The optimum bolus volume of ropivacaine with sufentanil while using push pump at a time interval of 30 min is approximately 5 mL. It could probably further reduce the hourly bolus volume for epidural labour analgesia.

Influence of different volumes and frequency of programmed intermittent epidural bolus in labor on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

In labor, programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) can be defined as the bolus administration of epidural solution at scheduled time intervals. Compared to continuous epidural infusion (CEI) with or without patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), PIEB has been associated with decreased pain scores and need for rescue analgesia and increased maternal satisfaction. The optimal volume and dosing interval of PIEB, however, has still not been determined.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022362708).

SETTINGS

Labor.

PATIENTS

Pregnant patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Central, CINAHL, Global Health, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials that examined pregnant patients in labor who received CEI or PIEB with or without a PCEA component. Network meta-analysis was performed with a frequentist method, facilitating the indirect comparison of PIEB with different volumes and dosing intervals through the common comparator of CEI and substituting or supplementing direct comparisons with these indirect ones. Continuous and dichotomous outcomes were presented as mean differences and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, 30 trials were included. For the first primary endpoint, need for rescue analgesia, PIEB delivered at a volume of 4 ml and frequency of 45 min (4/45) was inferior to PIEB 8/45 (OR 3.55; 95% CI 1.12-11.33), PIEB 10/60 was superior to PIEB 2.5/15 (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16-0.82), PIEB 4/45 (OR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03-0.71) and PIEB 5/60 (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.08-0.70), and PIEB 5/30 was not inferior to PIEB 10/60 (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.31-1.19). For the second primary endpoint, maternal satisfaction, no differences were present between the various PIEB regimens. The quality of evidence for these multiple primary endpoints was low owing to the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. Importantly, PIEB 5/30 decreased the pain score at 4 h compared to PIEB 2.5/15 (MD 2.45; 95% CI 0.13-4.76), PIEB 5/60 (MD -2.28; 95% CI -4.18--0.38) and PIEB 10/60 (MD 1.73; 95% CI 0.31-3.16). Mean ranking of interventions demonstrated PIEB 10/60 followed by PIEB 5/30 to be best placed to reduce the cumulative dose of local anesthetic, and this resulted in an improved incidence of lower limb motor blockade for PIEB 10/60 in comparison to CEI (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.14-0.67). No differences in neonatal outcomes were found. Some concerns were present for the risk of bias in two thirds of trials and the risk of bias was shown to be high in the remaining one third of trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research should focus on PIEB 5/30 and PIEB 10/60 and how the method of analgesia initiation, nature and concentration of local anesthetic, design of epidural catheter and rate of administration might influence outcomes related to the mother and neonate.

Efficacy and Safety of Epidural Chloroprocaine for Breakthrough Pain During Labor Analgesia: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

A significant number of women who undergo neuraxial labor analgesia experience breakthrough pain. Prompt mitigation of breakthrough pain is essential to improve maternal and fetal outcomes. We evaluated epidural chloroprocaine compared with ropivacaine in alleviating labor breakthrough pain.

METHODS

We performed a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial between May and July 2023. Eligible parturients received epidural analgesia with ropivacaine and sufentanil. Those with breakthrough pain were randomized to receive either 0.125% epidural ropivacaine (group R) or chloroprocaine at concentrations of 0.5% (group C1), 1.0% (group C2), or 1.5% (group C3), all in a volume of 6 mL. The primary outcome was the treatment success rate, indicated by a decrease of at least 4 points on the numerical rating scale pain score 9 min after analgesic injection. Secondary outcomes and adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

Out of 323 patients receiving epidural analgesia, 192 experienced breakthrough pain. After exclusion of three patients because of protocol deviation, there were 47, 48, 47, and 47 patients in group R, C1, C2, and C3, respectively. Group C3 demonstrated a higher treatment success rate (39/47, 83.0%) in managing breakthrough pain than group R (26/47, 55.3%), group C1 (12/48, 25.0%), and group C2 (30/47, 63.8%) (p < 0.001). Group C3 had lower numerical rating scale scores at 6 and 9 min after injection and required fewer patient-controlled epidural boluses than other groups. In addition, group C3 reported greater satisfaction than the other groups (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in obstetric or neonatal outcomes across these groups.

CONCLUSION

Parturients experiencing breakthrough pain could receive 1.5% epidural chloroprocaine, rather than lower chloroprocaine concentrations and ropivacaine, to achieve more rapid and better pain relief with higher patient satisfaction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2300071069, http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx .

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus in maintenance of epidural labor analgesia: a literature review

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB), administered by the infusion pump programmed to deliver boluses of epidural solution at certain intervals, is gradually gaining more attention as a technique to maintain the labor analgesia in recent years. Many studies find that it may have some advantages when compared with other methods. However, its exact effectiveness and optimal regimen are still unclear. We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published between January 2010 and June 2022. Of the 263 publications identified, 27 studies were included. The purpose of this review is to discuss the effects of PIEB with continuous epidural infusion (CEI) and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) in maintenance of epidural labor analgesia on labor outcomes and elucidate the latest research progress of implementation strategies.

Determination of the Optimal Volume of Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus When Combined With the Dural Puncture Epidural Technique for Labor Analgesia: A Random-Allocation Graded Dose-Response Study

BACKGROUND

The dural puncture epidural (DPE) and the programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) techniques are recent innovations for labor analgesia. The optimal volume of PIEB during traditional epidural analgesia has been investigated previously but it is unknown whether these findings are applicable to DPE. This study aimed to determine the optimal volume of PIEB for effective labor analgesia after initiation of analgesia using DPE.

METHODS

Parturients requesting labor analgesia received dural puncture with a 25-gauge Whitacre spinal needle and then had analgesia initiated with 15 mL of ropivacaine 0.1% with sufentanil 0.5 μg/mL. Analgesia was maintained using the same solution delivered by PIEB with boluses given at a fixed interval of 40 minutes starting 1 hour after the completion of the initial epidural dose. Parturients were randomized to 1 of 4 PIEB volume groups: 6, 8, 10, or 12 mL. Effective analgesia was defined as no requirement for a patient-controlled or manual epidural bolus for 6 hours after the completion of the initial epidural dose or until full cervical dilation. The PIEB volumes for effective analgesia in 50% of parturients (EV50) and 90% of parturients (EV90) were determined using probit regression.

RESULTS

The proportions of parturients with effective labor analgesia were 32%, 64%, 76%, and 96% in the 6-, 8-, 10-, and 12-mL groups, respectively. The estimated values for EV50 and EV90 were 7.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-7.9) mL and 11.3 (95% CI, 9.9-15.2) mL, respectively. There were no differences in side effects, including hypotension, nausea and vomiting, and fetal heart rate (FHR) abnormalities among groups.

CONCLUSION

Under the conditions of the study, after initiation of analgesia using DPE, the EV90 of PIEB for effective labor analgesia using ropivacaine 0.1% with sufentanil 0.5 μg/mL was approximately 11.3 mL.

The Effects of Different Puncture Points on Labor Analgesia Onset: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Parturients suffer severe pain during the stages of labor, especially the first and second. Epidural anesthesia is an effective method to alleviate labor pain. L2-3, L3-4 and L4-5 spaces have been reported to be the recommendable puncture points owing to the adequate analgesia effect and high safety. However, the speed of pain alleviation via the three points has hardly been determined, which is of great importance to parturients. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare the onset time of parturients' painless uterine contraction after epidural labor analgesia through different puncture points.

Study Design and Methods

It is a prospective, randomized, controlled, and subject- and assessor-blinded study. Totally, 150 subjects scheduled for vaginal delivery are going to be randomly assigned into the L2-3 and L3-4 group. Puncture point in L2-3 group is lumbar 2-3 space, while in L3-4 group it is lumbar 3-4 space. Analgesia initiation and maintenance are the same between the two groups. Primary outcome will be percentage of painless uterine contraction 15 min after epidural labor analgesia initiation. Secondary outcomes will be the sensory blocking level, motor blocking score, adverse effects of parturients, drug liquid consumption in unit interval, apgar score and degree of satisfaction of the parturients.

Discussion

This study estimates the onset time of parturients' painless uterine contraction after epidural labor analgesia through L2-3 or L3-4 space. The results may provide a better choice to relieve labor pain as soon as possible.

A randomized trial: The safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary pharmacodynamics of ropivacaine oil delivery depot in healthy subjects

INTRODUCTION

Ropivacaine oil delivery depot (RODD) can slowly release ropivacaine and block nerves for a long timejavascript:;. The aim of the present work was to investigate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary pharmacodynamics of RODD in subcutaneous injection among healthy subjects.

METHODS

The abdomens of 3 subjects were subcutaneously administered with a single-needle RODD containing 12~30 mg of ropivacaine. The irritation, nerve blocking range and optimum dose were investigated. Forty-one subjects were divided into RODD groups containing 150, 230, 300, 350 and 400 mg of ropivacaine and a ropivacaine hydrochloride injection (RHI) 150 mg group. Multineedle subcutaneous injection of RODD or RHI was performed in the abdomens of the subjects. The primary endpoint was a safe dose or a maximum dose of ropivacaine (400 mg). Subjects' vital signs were observed; their blood was analyzed; their cardiovascular system and nervous systems were monitored, and their dermatological reactions were observed and scored. Second, the ropivacaine concentrations in plasma were determined, pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated, and the anesthetic effects of RODD were studied, including RODD onset time, duration and intensity of nerve block.

RESULTS

Single-needle injection of RODD 24 mg was optimal for 3 subjects, and the range of nerve block was 42.5±20.8 mm. Multineedle subcutaneous injection of RODD in the abdomens of subjects was safe, and all adverse events were no more severe than grade II. The incidence rate of grade II adverse events, such as pain, and abnormal ST and ST-T segment changes on electrocardiography, was approximately 1%. The incidence rate of grade I adverse events, including erythema, papules, hypertriglyceridemia, and hypotension was greater than 10%. Erythema and papules were relieved after 24 h and disappeared after 72 h. Other adverse reactions disappeared after 7 days. The curve of ropivacaine concentration-time in plasma presented a bimodal profile. The results showed that ropivacaine was slowly released from the RODD. Compared with the 150 mg RHI group, Tmax was longer in the RODD groups. In particular, Tmax in the 400 mg RODD group was longer than that in the RHI group (11.8±4.6 h vs. 0.77±0.06 h). The Cmax in the 150 mg RODD group was lower than that in the 150 mg RHI group (0.35±0.09 vs. 0.58±0.13 μg·mL-1). In particular, the Cmax increased by 48% when the dose was increased by 2.6 times in the 400 mg group. Cmax, the AUC value and the intensity of the nerve block increased with increasing doses of RODD. Among them, the 400 mg RODD group presented the strongest nerve block (the percentage of level 2 and 3, 42.9%). The corresponding median onset time was 0.42 h, and the duration median was 35.7⁓47.7 h.

CONCLUSIONS

RODD has a sustained release effect. Compared with the RHI group, Tmax was delayed in the RODD groups, and the duration of nerve block was long. No abnormal reaction was found in the RODD group containing 400 mg of ropivacaine after subcutaneous injection among healthy subjects, suggesting that RODD was adequately safe.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chictr.org: CTR2200058122; Chinadrugtrials.org: CTR20192280.

High Dosage of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia (PCEA) with Low Background Infusion during Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) is well documented; however, it is unclear whether a high dosage of PCEA with a low dosage of background infusion during labor can be a safe and effective application.

METHODS

Group LH was administered a continuous infusion (CI) of 0.084 mL/kg/h with PCEA of 5 mL every 40 min. Group HL was given a CI of 0.028 mL/kg/h and PCEA of 10 mL every 40 min; Group HH was given a CI of 0.084 mL/kg/h and PCEA of 10 mL every 40 min. The primary outcomes were VAS pain score, the number of supplemental boluses, incidence of pain outbreaks, drug dose for pain outbreaks, PCA times, effective PCA times, anesthetic consumption, duration of analgesia, duration of labor and delivery outcome. Secondary outcomes included adverse reactions such as itching, nausea and vomiting during analgesia and neonatal Apgar scores 1 min and 5 min after birth.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients, 60 in each group were randomly assigned to one of three groups included group LH, group HL or group HH. The VAS scores were obviously decreased in HL group and HH group in comparison with LL group at 2 h after analgesia and the time point of full cervical dilation and delivery of baby. The time for third stage of labor in HH group was increased compared with LH group and HL group. Incidence of pain outbreaks in LH group was obviously increased compared with HL and HH group. The effective PCA times in HL group and HH group were remarkably reduced compared with those in LH group.

CONCLUSIONS

High dose of PCEA with a low background infusion can reduce effective PCA times, incidence of outbreak pain and the total amount of anesthetics without diminishing analgesia effects. However, high dose of PCEA with a high background infusion can enhance analgesia effect but increase the third stage of labor, instrumental delivery ratio and the total amount of anesthetics.

Randomized Assessment of the Optimal Time Interval Between Programmed Intermittent Epidural Boluses When Combined With the Dural Puncture Epidural Technique for Labor Analgesia

BACKGROUND

The dural puncture epidural (DPE) and programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) techniques are recent advances in neuraxial labor analgesia. Previous studies have investigated the PIEB optimal interval for effective analgesia when a standard epidural technique is used to initiate labor analgesia. However, it is unknown whether these findings are applicable when DPE is used.

METHODS

Patients were randomized into 1 of 5 groups with PIEB intervals of 35, 40, 45, 50, or 55 minutes. Labor analgesia was initiated on request with a DPE technique by epidural injection over 2 minutes of 15 mL of ropivacaine 0.1% with sufentanil 0.5 μg/mL after a dural puncture with a 25-gauge Whitacre needle. Effective analgesia was defined as no additional requirement for a patient-controlled bolus during the first stage of labor. The PIEB interval that was effective in 50% of patients (EI50) and 90% of patients (EI90) was estimated using probit regression.

RESULTS

One hundred laboring parturients received the DPE technique of whom 93 proceeded to have analgesia maintained with PIEB using 10 mL boluses of ropivacaine 0.1% and sufentanil 0.5 μg/mL. Totals of 89.5% (17/19), 84.2% (16/19), 82.4% (14/17), 52.6% (11/19), and 36.8% (7/19) of patients in groups 35, 40, 45, 50, and 55, respectively, received effective PIEB analgesia. The estimated values for EI50 and EI90 were 52.5 (95% CI, 48.4-62.6) minutes and 37.0 (95% CI, 28.4-40.9) minutes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The estimate of the PIEB optimal interval for effective analgesia after the DPE technique was comparable to that reported in previous studies when analgesia was initiated using a conventional epidural technique.

Optimization of programmed intermittent epidural bolus volume for different concentrations of ropivacaine in labor analgesia: a biased coin up-and-down sequential allocation trial

Background and objectives

To date, programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) has been widely used in obstetric analgesia, while no optimal PIEB regimen has been proposed. This study aimed to assess effective analgesia in 90% of women (EV90) with different concentrations of ropivacaine (0.075% and 0.1%) combined with 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil, at an interval of 40 min using the biased coin design-up-and-down method (BCD-UDM), and to explore whether there is a difference in EV90 with the increase of ropivacaine concentration.

Methods

In total, 103 primiparous women were assigned to two groups, including group A (n = 52) and group B (n = 51). Parturients in group A were treated with 0.075% ropivacaine and 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil, while those in group B were treated with 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil. Used the biased coin up-and-down sequential allocation method to determine the EV90. The secondary outcomes were sensory block level, motor block, and adverse events (hypotension, urinary retention, and pruritus).

Results

The results revealed that EV90 was 10 mL (95% confidence interval (CI):8.03–11.54) in group A, and EV90 was 9 mL (95% CI:7.49–10.51) in group B by the isotonic regression method. The highest level of the sensory block was T8, and the lowest was T12. No case of hypotension was recorded,and only 4 parturients complained of motor block.

Conclusion

With an interval of 40 min, the optimal PIEB bolus volume of 0.075% ropivacaine and 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil was 10 mL, 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil was 9 mL. Moreover, the PIEB volume decreased along with the higher concentration of ropivacaine.

Trial registration

ChiCTR registration number: ChiCTR2000040917. Registration date: December 15, 2020.

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus in parturients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) in parturients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (from inception to July 2021) were searched for identification of randomized placebo-controlled trials in which PIEB was applied in parturients. The outcomes were the effect of analgesia, satisfaction score, mode of delivery, duration of labor, neonatal condition, and adverse events. The pooled odds ratios (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random- and fixed-effects models.

RESULTS

PIEB was found to be associated with decreased total consumption of ropivacaine (WMD = -15.83, 95% CI: -19.06 to -12.60, P < .00001; I2 = 61%; P for heterogeneity = .04), total consumption of sufentanil (WMD = -4.93, 95% CI: -6.87 to 2.98, P < .00001; I2 = 68%; P for heterogeneity = .05), numbers of patients who require patient-controlled epidural analgesia bolus (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.14-0.51, P < .0001; I2 = 65%; P for heterogeneity = .01), the number of attempts (WMD = -4.12, 95% CI: -7.21 to -1.04, P = .009; I2 = 100%; P for heterogeneity < .00001), rate of breakthrough pain (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.28-0.80, P = .005; I2 = 47%; P for heterogeneity = .09). Eight studies focus on the duration of analgesia. After by meta-analysis, we found that the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 30 minutes, 2 hours, 4 hours, and 5 hours in PIEB group was significantly lower when compared with control group, (WMD = -0.15, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.04, P = .006; I2 = 0%; P for heterogeneity = .64), (WMD = -0.79, 95% CI: -1.32 to 0.25, P = .004; I2 = 97%; P for heterogeneity < .00001), (WMD = -1.00, 95% CI: -1.08 to -0.91, P < .00001; I2 = 0%; P for heterogeneity = .67), (WMD = -1.81, 95% CI: -3.23 to -0.39, P = .01; I2 = 98%; P for heterogeneity < .00001), respectively. Nineteen studies discussed the mode of delivery between 2 groups. The results suggest that the rate of normal delivery is significantly higher in PIEB group compared with control group (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.08-1.75, P = .01). The time of first and second stage of labor are significantly shorter in PIEB group compared with control group, the result is (WMD = -10.52, 95% CI: -14.74 to 4.76, P < .00001; I2 = 0%; P for heterogeneity = .86), (WMD = -1.48, 95% CI: -2.26 to -0.69, P = .0002; I2 = 35%; P for heterogeneity = .10), respectively. Thirteen studies concerned the satisfaction score of patients. The satisfaction score of patients in the PIEB group was significantly higher when compared with control group (WMD = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.42-1.39, P = .0003; I2 = 98%; P for heterogeneity < .00001). The Apgar score at 1, 5 minutes in PIEB group are significantly higher (WMD = 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.13 P = .007; I2 = 55%; P for heterogeneity = .04), (WMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.12 to -0.05, P < .00001; I2 = 21%; P for heterogeneity = .27), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PIEB is a good alternative for labor analgesia with better analgesic effect, maternal and infant outcome.