Continuous ropivacaine wound infiltration versus epidural morphine after unplanned caesarean delivery: A noninferiority randomised controlled study
Primary resultResult — go to the resultMean VAS pain difference 1.2 95% CI 0.2–2.3Authors' conclusion
We failed to show that continuous ropivacaine wound infiltration was noninferior to epidural morphine in providing analgesia after unplanned caesarean delivery.
Study context
- Population
- Women undergoing unplanned lower segment caesarean section under epidural anaesthesia
- Participants
- 81 women
- Comparison
- Continuous ropivacaine wound infiltration vs epidural morphine
- Primary endpoint
- Pain during mobilisation (VAS 0 to 10)
- Follow-up
- 24 h postsurgery
Methodological detailstriple-blinded, noninferiority, single-centre, One university hospital, February 2015 to August 2021
- Triple-blinded
- Noninferiority
- Single-centre
- One university hospital, February 2015 to August 2021
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Mean VAS pain difference
1.2
95% CI 0.2–2.3
By group
Ropivacaine
4.4
95% CI 3.6–5.1
Morphine
3.1
95% CI 2.4–3.9
Ropivacaine vs Morphine
mean VAS pain difference 1.2 (95% CI 0.2–2.3)
Further findings
Pain at rest and during mobilisation at 6 and 24 h
- Differences between the two groups statistically significant
Rescue morphine and satisfaction
- Ropivacaine group received rescue morphine more frequently and was less satisfied
Safety
Morphine-related side effects
- Fewer morphine-related side effects in the ropivacaine group
Technical failure of continuous wound infiltration
- Continuous wound infiltration not technically feasible
- 18%
Original publication
Continuous ropivacaine wound infiltration versus epidural morphine after unplanned caesarean delivery: A noninferiority randomised controlled study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. Published 5 February 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →