Epidural analgesia for childbirth: effects of newer techniques on neonatal outcome

Association between Maternal Neuraxial Analgesia and Neonatal Outcomes in Very Preterm Infants

Background  Although the use of neuraxial analgesia has been shown to improve uteroplacental blood flow and maternal and fetal hemodynamics related to labor pain, possibly improving immediate outcomes in term neonates, the association between neuraxial analgesia use and outcomes in preterm neonates remains unclear. Objective  The aim of this article was to evaluate the association between maternal use of neuraxial analgesia and neonatal outcomes in very preterm infants. Methods  This is a retrospective cohort study of women delivering singleton neonates between 23 and 32 weeks' gestation at a large academic center between 2012 and 2016. Outcomes of neonates born to women who used neuraxial analgesia for labor and/or delivery were compared to those whose mothers did not. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess the independent associations of neuraxial analgesia use with neonatal outcomes after controlling for potential confounders, including gestational age, mode of delivery, and existing interventions to improve neonatal outcomes of prematurity. Results  Of 478 eligible women who delivered singleton very preterm neonates in this study period, 352 (73.6%) used neuraxial analgesia. Women who used neuraxial analgesia were more likely to have delivered at a later preterm gestational age, to have a higher birthweight, to have preeclampsia and/or hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet count (HELLP), to have undergone labor induction, to have delivered by cesarean delivery, and to have received obstetric interventions such as magnesium prophylaxis for fetal neuroprotection, antenatal corticosteroids for fetal lung maturity, and antibiotics prior to delivery; they were less likely to have been diagnosed with a clinical abruption. Neuraxial analgesia was associated with decreased incidence of cord umbilical artery pH less than 7.0 (24.7 vs. 34.9%, p  = 0.03), as well as decreased incidence of neonatal intensive care unit length of stay over 60 days (35.5 vs. 48.4%, p  = 0.01), although these associations did not persist on multivariable analysis. On multivariable analyses, neuraxial analgesia remained independently associated with decreased odds of necrotizing enterocolitis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12-0.62) and grade III/IV intraventricular hemorrhage (aOR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.87). These associations remained significant on sensitivity analyses, which were performed between 10 and 90% of the overall cohort in order to control for outliers, as well as between the subgroup of patients who received obstetric interventions. Conclusions  Maternal neuraxial analgesia use may be associated with lower odds of adverse outcomes in very preterm infants, even after controlling for existing interventions for prematurity. Prior work has suggested such effects may be due to improved neonatal acid-base status from changes in placental perfusion and maternal pain management, but further work is required to prospectively investigate such associations.

Effects of Labor Epidural Analgesia on Short Term Neonatal Morbidity

BACKGROUND

Epidural Analgesia (EA) is the most effective and most commonly used method for pain relief during labor. Some researchers have observed an association between EA and increased neonatal morbidity. But this observation was not consistent in many other studies.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the study was to examine whether exposure to epidural analgesia increased the risk of NICU admission. The secondary objectives included the risks of clinical chorioamnionitis, instrumental delivery, neonatal depression, respiratory distress, birth trauma, and neonatal seizure during the first 24 hours of life.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study involving 2360 low-risk nulliparous women who delivered at AWH, Qatar, during the two years between January 2016 December and 2017. Short-term neonatal outcomes of the mothers who received EA in active labor were compared with a similar population who did not receive EA. As secondary objectives, labor parameters like maternal temperature elevation, duration of the second stage of labor, and instrumental delivery were compared.

RESULTS

Significantly higher numbers of neonates were admitted to the NICU from the EA group (P<0.001, OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.46). They were more likely to have respiratory distress (P=0.01, OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.07), birth injuries (P=0.02, OR =1.71, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.74), admission temperature>37.5 °C (P=0.04, OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 11.49), need for oxygen on the first day (P=0.04, OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.07) and receive antibiotics (P<0.001, OR 2.06,95% CI 1.47 to 2.79). There was no difference in the Apgar score at 1 minute (P=0.12), need of resuscitation at birth (P=0.05), neonatal white cell count (P=0.34), platelet count (P=0.38) and C reactive protein (P=0.84). Mothers who received EA had a lengthier second stage (P<0.001), temperature elevation >37.5°C (P<0.001, OR 7.40, 95% CI 3.93 to 13.69) and instrumental delivery (P<0.001, OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.68).

CONCLUSION

EA increases NICU admission, antibiotic exposure, neonatal birth injuries, need for positive pressure ventilation at birth, and respiratory distress in the first 24 hours of life. Mothers on epidural analgesia have prolonged second stage of labor, a higher rate of instrumental delivery, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, fetal distress, and temperature elevation.

Factors associated with choice of delivery with or without epidural analgesia among laboring women: a cross-sectional survey at a tertiary care hospital of a developing country

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors responsible for epidural analgesia (EA) refusal among parturient patients.

METHODS

In this prospective cross-sectional study of six months, we included all consenting postpartum patients having a non-operative delivery in the obstetric unit of our hospital. Data were collected on a predesigned questionnaire and included information such as parity, education, reasons for delivering with or without EA, source of information and patient satisfaction. Knowledge regarding EA was assessed from patients delivering without EA.

RESULTS

From 933 patients enrolled, 730 (78.2%) delivered without EA, and 203 (21.7%) with EA. Only 11 (1.5%) patients refused EA for the reason of having natural birth process. Otherwise common reasons were misconceptions (65.9%) and lack of awareness about EA (20.5%); 70.5% had no knowledge of common side effects of EA. Among patients delivering with EA, 92.6% were offered EA by health care providers and had obstetricians and anesthesiologists as their sources of information.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in developing countries are laboring without EA, even in centers where there is a provision for it. The main reasons for not availing themselves of EA are lack of awareness and knowledge and misconceptions, rather than the desire to have un-medicated natural birth.

A prospective review of the labor analgesia programme in a teaching hospital

BACKGROUND

The structured labor analgesia programme in our tertiary care hospital has been in place for the past few years. We undertook this study to analyze the programme and to draw conclusions to further improve the outcomes.

METHODS

A prospective analysis of the data pertaining to 200 patients participating in an ongoing labor analgesia programme in a tertiary care hospital from Nov 2008 to Aug 2009 was performed.

RESULTS

Mean visual analog score (VAS) before epidural block was 8.34 ± 0.79. Post procedure the average VAS score was 2.20 ± 0.79. One hundred and fifty six (78%) parturients delivered vaginally, 18 (9%) required instrumentation with vacuum including 1 forceps delivery in a multiparous parturient. In 17parturients (8.7%) fetal distress led to a decision to perform LSCS for delivery. Multiparous patients were significantly more satisfied as compared to nulliparous patients (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated excellent pain relief and patient satisfaction with minimal complications. The safety and efficacy of epidural bupivacaine in concentrations less than 0.625% combined with 25 mcg of fentanyl demonstrated in our study should be considered are commendation for the widespread adoption of the procedure in tertiary care hospitals.

Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

The pain that women experience during labour is affected by multiple physiological and psychosocial factors and its intensity can vary greatly.  Most women in labour require pain relief. Pain management strategies include non-pharmacological interventions (that aim to help women cope with pain in labour) and pharmacological interventions (that aim to relieve the pain of labour).

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions to manage pain in labour. We considered findings from non-Cochrane systematic reviews if there was no relevant Cochrane review.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 5), The Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2 of 4), MEDLINE (1966 to 31 May 2011) and EMBASE (1974 to 31 May 2011) to identify all relevant systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of pain management in labour. Each of the contributing Cochrane reviews (nine new, six updated) followed a generic protocol with 13 common primary efficacy and safety outcomes. Each Cochrane review included comparisons with placebo, standard care or with a different intervention according to a predefined hierarchy of interventions. Two review authors extracted data and assessed methodological quality, and data were checked by a third author. This overview is a narrative summary of the results obtained from individual reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 Cochrane reviews (255 included trials) and three non-Cochrane reviews (55 included trials) for inclusion within this overview. For all interventions, with available data, results are presented as comparisons of: 1. Intervention versus placebo or standard care; 2. Different forms of the same intervention (e.g. one opioid versus another opioid); 3. One type of intervention versus a different type of intervention (e.g. TENS versus opioid). Not all reviews included results for all comparisons. Most reviews compared the intervention with placebo or standard care, but with the exception of opioids and epidural analgesia, there were few direct comparisons between different forms of the same intervention, and even fewer comparisons between different interventions. Based on these three comparisons, we have categorised interventions into: " What works" ,"What may work", and "Insufficient evidence to make a judgement".WHAT WORKSEvidence suggests that epidural, combined spinal epidural (CSE) and inhaled analgesia effectively manage pain in labour, but may give rise to adverse effects. Epidural, and inhaled analgesia effectively relieve pain when compared with placebo or a different type of intervention (epidural versus opioids). Combined-spinal epidurals relieve pain more quickly than traditional or low dose epidurals. Women receiving inhaled analgesia were more likely to experience vomiting, nausea and dizziness.When compared with placebo or opioids, women receiving epidural analgesia had more instrumental vaginal births and caesarean sections for fetal distress, although there was no difference in the rates of caesarean section overall. Women receiving epidural analgesia were more likely to experience hypotension, motor blockade, fever or urinary retention. Less urinary retention was observed in women receiving CSE than in women receiving traditional epidurals. More women receiving CSE than low-dose epidural experienced pruritus.  WHAT MAY WORKThere is some evidence to suggest that immersion in water, relaxation, acupuncture, massage and local anaesthetic nerve blocks or non-opioid drugs may improve management of labour pain, with few adverse effects.  Evidence was mainly limited to single trials. These interventions relieved pain and improved satisfaction with pain relief (immersion, relaxation, acupuncture, local anaesthetic nerve blocks, non-opioids) and childbirth experience (immersion, relaxation, non-opioids) when compared with placebo or standard care. Relaxation was associated with fewer assisted vaginal births and acupuncture was associated with fewer assisted vaginal births and caesarean sections.INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCEThere is insufficient evidence to make judgements on whether or not hypnosis, biofeedback, sterile water injection, aromatherapy, TENS, or parenteral opioids are more effective than placebo or other interventions for pain management in labour. In comparison with other opioids more women receiving pethidine experienced adverse effects including drowsiness and nausea. 

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most methods of non-pharmacological pain management are non-invasive and appear to be safe for mother and baby, however, their efficacy is unclear, due to limited high quality evidence. In many reviews, only one or two trials provided outcome data for analysis and the overall methodological quality of the trials was low. High quality trials are needed.There is more evidence to support the efficacy of pharmacological methods, but these have more adverse effects. Thus, epidural analgesia provides effective pain relief but at the cost of increased instrumental vaginal birth.It remains important to tailor methods used to each woman's wishes, needs and circumstances, such as anticipated duration of labour, the infant's condition, and any augmentation or induction of labour.A major challenge in compiling this overview, and the individual systematic reviews on which it is based, has been the variation in use of different process and outcome measures in different trials, particularly assessment of pain and its relief, and effects on the neonate after birth. This made it difficult to pool results from otherwise similar studies, and to derive conclusions from the totality of evidence. Other important outcomes have simply not been assessed in trials; thus, despite concerns for 30 years or more about the effects of maternal opioid administration during labour on subsequent neonatal behaviour and its influence on breastfeeding, only two out of 57 trials of opioids reported breastfeeding as an outcome. We therefore strongly recommend that the outcome measures, agreed through wide consultation for this project, are used in all future trials of methods of pain management.

Evidence-based practices for the fetal to newborn transition

Many common care practices during labor, birth, and the immediate postpartum period impact the fetal to neonatal transition, including medication used during labor, suctioning protocols, strategies to prevent heat loss, umbilical cord clamping, and use of 100% oxygen for resuscitation. Many of the care practices used to assess and manage a newborn immediately after birth have not proven efficacious. No definitive outcomes have been obtained from studies on maternal analgesia effects on the newborn. Although immediate cord clamping is common practice, recent evidence from large randomized, controlled trials suggests that delayed cord clamping may protect the infant against anemia. Skin-to-skin care of the newborn after birth is recommended as the mainstay of newborn thermoregulation and care. Routine suctioning of infants at birth was not been found to be beneficial. Neither amnioinfusion, suctioning of meconium-stained babies after the birth of the head, nor intubation and suctioning of vigorous infants prevents meconium aspiration syndrome. The use of 100% oxygen at birth to resuscitate a newborn causes increased oxidative stress and does not appear to offer benefits over room air. This review of evidence on newborn care practices reveals that more often than not, less intervention is better. The recommendations support a gentle, physiologic birth and family-centered care of the newborn.