Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2025
Elevating Labor Analgesia: The Impact of Low-Dose Intrathecal Ropivacaine-Sufentanil in Combined Spinal-Epidural Analgesia: A Prospective Double-Blinded Randomized Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) analgesia delivers rapid labor pain relief, yet high intrathecal opioid doses carry adverse effects, and ultra-low doses shorten block duration. Whether a low intrathecal dose of ropivacaine-sufentanil within CSE reduces clinician-delivered rescue boluses, compared with epidural analgesia (EA) or dural-puncture epidural (DPE), remains unclear. Methods: Laboring women requesting neuraxial analgesia were randomized to three groups: EA, DPE, and CSE. In the CSE group, analgesia was initiated with 2 mL of solution (1 mL 0.1% ropivacaine plus 1 mL containing 1 μg sufentanil), while the EA and DPE groups received 15 mL of 0.09% ropivacaine with 0.4 μg/mL sufentanil. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients requiring supplemental provider-administered analgesia for breakthrough pain. Secondary outcomes included analgesia onset time, VAS scores at multiple time points, patient-controlled epidural analgesia button presses, and cumulative analgesic consumption. Results: A total of 131 women completed the study: 42 (EA), 44 (DPE), and 45 (CSE). After adjusting for age, gestational age, cervical dilation, ASA status, BMI, and baseline VAS, the CSE group showed a significantly lower need for supplemental analgesia compared to EA (22% vs 48%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.10-0.78; P=0.013). The DPE group (30%) also exhibited a lower incidence than EA, but the difference did not reach significance (aOR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.16-1.09; P=0.09). Between CSE and DPE, no significant difference emerged (aOR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.24-1.74; P=0.27). The primary hypothesis that CSE would outperform both EA and DPE was not fully supported. For secondary outcomes, the CSE group demonstrated faster onset and significantly lower VAS scores at prespecified intervals than DPE and EA (P<0.001). Conclusion: Low-dose intrathecal ropivacaine-sufentanil CSE reduced supplemental analgesia needs versus EA but not DPE. Although CSE produced a faster onset and greater sensory block, its superiority over DPE was not established. Thus, CSE and DPE are clinically acceptable, with CSE potentially favored where minimal breakthrough pain is prioritized; further multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these findings. Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2300076206. The trial is publicly available and is registered at www.chictr.org.cn on Sept 7, 2023.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.