Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study aims to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of the Dural Puncture Epidural (DPE) technique versus the Conventional Epidural (CE) technique for labor analgesia in primigravida.
The conventional epidural (CE) technique has been the gold standard for decades, providing continuous and adjustable pain relief during labor. However, the advent of new techniques, such as the Dural Puncture Epidural (DPE) technique, has led to ongoing research and debate over which method offers superior outcomes in terms of efficacy, onset of analgesia, maternal satisfaction, and safety.
The CE technique involves the placement of an epidural catheter into the epidural space, where local anesthetics and adjunctive drugs are administered to provide pain relief. While this technique is highly effective, it is not without limitations. Some parturients may experience a slow onset of analgesia, uneven drug distribution, or the need for frequent catheter adjustments, which can delay adequate pain relief and decrease maternal satisfaction . Furthermore, the CE technique has been associated with potential complications such as unilateral blocks, inadequate sacral analgesia, and the necessity for higher doses of local anesthetics, which may increase the risk of motor blockade and impact labor progression .
In contrast, the DPE technique is a novel approach that modifies the CE by incorporating an intentional dural puncture with a small-gauge spinal needle without administering intrathecal drugs. This modification is believed to facilitate the spread of epidurally administered drugs into the subarachnoid space, potentially enhancing the onset and quality of analgesia. The DPE technique aims to combine the benefits of both the CE and the Combined Spinal Epidural (CSE) techniques while minimizing their respective drawbacks, such as the hemodynamic instability associated with CSE and the slower onset of analgesia often seen with CE
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| group A | Active Comparator | dural puncture epidural technique in labour analgesia |
|
| group B | Active Comparator | conventional epidural technique in labour analgesia |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| epidural set | Device | The epidural space will be identified at either the L3-L4 or L4-L5 interspace using the loss of resistance technique with an 18 Gauge Epidural needle.A test dose of 3 mL of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine will be administered to each participant to rule out intravascular or intrathecal placement of the catheter. This ensures the proper placement of the catheter before the full dose of analgesia is administered.Following the test dose, an initial bolus of 8 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine combined with 2 μg/mL fentanyl will be administered to provide effective labor analgesia. Subsequently, maintenance Dose 0.125% 2 ml/0.5 hr |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| onset of analgesia | be th e onset of effective Analgesia , defined as the time from the administration of the initial epidural bolus to a reduction in Visual Analogue Scale pain score to less than 3 | 1 year |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| mohamed A zidan, resident | Contact | 01003707158 | mohamed_zidan_post@med.sohag.edu.eg |
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 28067707 | Background | Chau A, Bibbo C, Huang CC, Elterman KG, Cappiello EC, Robinson JN, Tsen LC. Dural Puncture Epidural Technique Improves Labor Analgesia Quality With Fewer Side Effects Compared With Epidural and Combined Spinal Epidural Techniques: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Anesth Analg. 2017 Feb;124(2):560-569. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001798. | |
| 30293143 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Release Date | Unrelease Date | Unrelease Date Unknown | Reset Date | MCP Release Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2026 |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D048949 | Labor Pain |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010146 | Pain |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Gunaydin B, Erel S. How neuraxial labor analgesia differs by approach: dural puncture epidural as a novel option. J Anesth. 2019 Feb;33(1):125-130. doi: 10.1007/s00540-018-2564-y. Epub 2018 Oct 6. |