Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study

Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with int...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Suzuki, Hiroko [verfasserIn] Kamiya, Yoshinori Fujiwara, Takashi Yoshida, Takayuki Takamatsu, Misako Sato, Kazunori

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2015

Schlagwörter:	Cesarean delivery Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine Opioid-free epidural analgesia Postoperative pain Adverse effects

Anmerkung:	© The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: JA clinical reports - Berlin : Springer, 2015, 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug.
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:1 ; year:2015 ; number:1 ; day:27 ; month:08

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6

Katalog-ID:	SPR038025922

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR038025922
003	DE-627
005	20230519141453.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR038025922
035			\|a (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Suzuki, Hiroko \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
264		1	\|c 2015
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
520			\|a Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA.
650		4	\|a Cesarean delivery \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Opioid-free epidural analgesia \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Postoperative pain \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Adverse effects \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Kamiya, Yoshinori \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Fujiwara, Takashi \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Yoshida, Takayuki \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Takamatsu, Misako \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Sato, Kazunori \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t JA clinical reports \|d Berlin : Springer, 2015 \|g 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. \|w (DE-627)84410051X \|w (DE-600)2842877-8 \|x 2363-9024 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:1 \|g year:2015 \|g number:1 \|g day:27 \|g month:08
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 1 \|j 2015 \|e 1 \|b 27 \|c 08

Indexfelder

author_variant	h s hs y k yk t f tf t y ty m t mt k s ks
matchkey_str	article:23639024:2015----::nrteamrhnvrueiuarpvcienuinoaagsafecsr
hierarchy_sort_str	2015
publishDate	2015
allfields	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 doi (DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Suzuki, Hiroko verfasserin aut Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kamiya, Yoshinori aut Fujiwara, Takashi aut Yoshida, Takayuki aut Takamatsu, Misako aut Sato, Kazunori aut Enthalten in JA clinical reports Berlin : Springer, 2015 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. (DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8 2363-9024 nnns volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2015 1 27 08
spelling	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 doi (DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Suzuki, Hiroko verfasserin aut Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kamiya, Yoshinori aut Fujiwara, Takashi aut Yoshida, Takayuki aut Takamatsu, Misako aut Sato, Kazunori aut Enthalten in JA clinical reports Berlin : Springer, 2015 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. (DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8 2363-9024 nnns volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2015 1 27 08
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 doi (DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Suzuki, Hiroko verfasserin aut Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kamiya, Yoshinori aut Fujiwara, Takashi aut Yoshida, Takayuki aut Takamatsu, Misako aut Sato, Kazunori aut Enthalten in JA clinical reports Berlin : Springer, 2015 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. (DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8 2363-9024 nnns volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2015 1 27 08
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 doi (DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Suzuki, Hiroko verfasserin aut Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kamiya, Yoshinori aut Fujiwara, Takashi aut Yoshida, Takayuki aut Takamatsu, Misako aut Sato, Kazunori aut Enthalten in JA clinical reports Berlin : Springer, 2015 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. (DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8 2363-9024 nnns volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2015 1 27 08
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 doi (DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Suzuki, Hiroko verfasserin aut Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kamiya, Yoshinori aut Fujiwara, Takashi aut Yoshida, Takayuki aut Takamatsu, Misako aut Sato, Kazunori aut Enthalten in JA clinical reports Berlin : Springer, 2015 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. (DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8 2363-9024 nnns volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2015 1 27 08
language	English
source	Enthalten in JA clinical reports 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08
sourceStr	Enthalten in JA clinical reports 1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug. volume:1 year:2015 number:1 day:27 month:08
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Cesarean delivery Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine Opioid-free epidural analgesia Postoperative pain Adverse effects
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	JA clinical reports
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Suzuki, Hiroko @@aut@@ Kamiya, Yoshinori @@aut@@ Fujiwara, Takashi @@aut@@ Yoshida, Takayuki @@aut@@ Takamatsu, Misako @@aut@@ Sato, Kazunori @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2015-08-27T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	84410051X
id	SPR038025922
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR038025922</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519141453.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR038025922</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Suzuki, Hiroko</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cesarean delivery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Opioid-free epidural analgesia</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Postoperative pain</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Adverse effects</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kamiya, Yoshinori</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fujiwara, Takashi</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yoshida, Takayuki</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Takamatsu, Misako</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sato, Kazunori</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">JA clinical reports</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)84410051X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2842877-8</subfield><subfield code="x">2363-9024</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:27</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">27</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Suzuki, Hiroko
spellingShingle	Suzuki, Hiroko misc Cesarean delivery misc Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine misc Opioid-free epidural analgesia misc Postoperative pain misc Adverse effects Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
authorStr	Suzuki, Hiroko
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)84410051X
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	2363-9024
topic_title	Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study Cesarean delivery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Opioid-free epidural analgesia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Postoperative pain (dpeaa)DE-He213 Adverse effects (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Cesarean delivery misc Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine misc Opioid-free epidural analgesia misc Postoperative pain misc Adverse effects
topic_unstemmed	misc Cesarean delivery misc Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine misc Opioid-free epidural analgesia misc Postoperative pain misc Adverse effects
topic_browse	misc Cesarean delivery misc Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine misc Opioid-free epidural analgesia misc Postoperative pain misc Adverse effects
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	JA clinical reports
hierarchy_parent_id	84410051X
hierarchy_top_title	JA clinical reports
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)84410051X (DE-600)2842877-8
title	Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR038025922 (SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e
title_full	Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
author_sort	Suzuki, Hiroko
journal	JA clinical reports
journalStr	JA clinical reports
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2015
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Suzuki, Hiroko Kamiya, Yoshinori Fujiwara, Takashi Yoshida, Takayuki Takamatsu, Misako Sato, Kazunori
container_volume	1
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Suzuki, Hiroko
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6
title_sort	intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after cesarean section: a retrospective study
title_auth	Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
abstract	Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstractGer	Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstract_unstemmed	Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA. © The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6
remote_bool	true
author2	Kamiya, Yoshinori Fujiwara, Takashi Yoshida, Takayuki Takamatsu, Misako Sato, Kazunori
author2Str	Kamiya, Yoshinori Fujiwara, Takashi Yoshida, Takayuki Takamatsu, Misako Sato, Kazunori
ppnlink	84410051X
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6
up_date	2024-07-03T15:48:10.159Z
_version_	1803573463786455040
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR038025922</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519141453.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR038025922</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40981-015-0005-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Suzuki, Hiroko</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2015. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Analgesia after Cesarean delivery (CD) requires early ambulation to prevent thromboembolic disease and to facilitate baby care. We retrospectively reviewed anesthesia charts and medical records of patients who underwent CD to compare the efficacy of spinal anesthesia supplemented with intrathecal morphine hydrochloride (ITM) and combined spinal–epidural anesthesia followed by opioid-free epidural analgesia (CSEA-EDA). Findings All subjects underwent CD at Nagaoka Chuo General Hospital between February 2012 and January 2013. Patient characteristics, time to first analgesic rescue after CD, and analgesic use after CD were examined. Incidences of postural hypotension, lower extremity numbness/weakness, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and pruritus were also examined for 48 h after CD. Average time to first analgesic use after CD (ITM 25.13 ± 16.07 h, CSEA-EDA 22.42 ± 16.27 h, p = 0.521) and cumulative probability of rescue analgesic use (p = 0.139 by log-rank test) were comparable between groups. However, average analgesic use within 24 h was lower in the ITM group (0.75 ± 1.05 times) than in the CSEA-EDA group (1.52 ± 1.72 times, p = 0.0497). Numbness or motor weakness in lower extremities only occurred in the CSEA-EDA group, and pruritus only occurred in the ITM group. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that ITM is better than CSEA-EDA for anesthesia following CD with regard to pain control. Also, ITM would be advantageous for early ambulation following CD because of lower incidence of numbness and motor weakness in lower extremities compared to CSEA-EDA.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cesarean delivery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Opioid-free epidural analgesia</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Postoperative pain</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Adverse effects</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kamiya, Yoshinori</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fujiwara, Takashi</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yoshida, Takayuki</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Takamatsu, Misako</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sato, Kazunori</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">JA clinical reports</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2015), 1 vom: 27. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)84410051X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2842877-8</subfield><subfield code="x">2363-9024</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:27</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40981-015-0005-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">27</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4022093

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Intrathecal morphine versus epidural ropivacaine infusion for analgesia after Cesarean section: a retrospective study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?