Chinese Medical E-ournals Database
Adv Search
中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)

Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition) ›› 2022, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (05): 577 -584. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2022.05.012

Original Article

Effects of epidural labor analgesia-related intrapartum fever on maternal and neonatal outcomes

Baisui Liu, Xia Ni, Qin Wang†()   

  1. Department of Obstetrics, Zhenjiang Maternity & Child Health Hospital of Jiangsu Province, Zhenjiang 212000, Jiangsu Province, China
  • Received:2022-08-10 Revised:2022-09-14 Published:2022-10-01
  • Corresponding author: Qin Wang
  • Supported by:
    Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province(BK20201227)
HTML ( ) PDF ( )
Objective

To investigate the effect of epidural labor analgesia-related intrapartum fever (ELARIF) on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Methods

A total of 980 parturients who underwent epidural labor analgesia (ELA) in Zhenjiang Maternity & Child Health Hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 were selected as research subjects. According to whether maternal ELARIF occurred or not, they were divided into fever group (n=74, parturients with ELARIF whose tympanic temperature ≥ 38 ℃), and control group (n=906, parturients without ELARIF whose tympanic temperature <38 ℃) by retrospective cohort study method. The general clinical data, intrapartum and postpartum related data, ELA related data and neonatal related data of two groups of parturients were compared by independent-samples t test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, continuity adjusted chi-square test or Fisher exact probability method. The procedure followed in this study met requirements of the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association revised in 2013.

Results

①There were no significant differences between two groups in terms of age, height, gestational age at delivery, times of abortions, incidence of premature rupture of membranes, body mass index (BMI) before pregnant and at delivery, increased value of BMI during pregnancy, incidence of hypertension in pregnancy, gestational diabetes mellitus, upper respiratory tract infection, and group B streptococcal infection, white blood cell count, percentage of neutrophils and hemoglobin at delivery and other general clinical data (P>0.05). ②The total incidence of artificial rupture of membranes, incidence of artificial rupture of membranes caused by ELARIF, rate of conversion to cesarean section, duration of the first and second stages of labor and total stage of labor, the time from the beginning of labor to ELA, the time from ELA to delivery, and incidence of postpartum urinary retention (PUR) of spontaneous parturients in fever group all were significantly higher or longer than those in control group, and all the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). ③In fever group, the dosage of ELA in parturients who were transferred to cesarean section was (39.9±24.2) mL, ELA duration was 4.8 h (3.8 h, 6.3 h), and score of pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at the end of ELA was 6 points (5 points, 6 points), which were significantly higher and longer than (37.1±24.9) mL, 3.6 h (2.3 h, 5.3 h) and 4 points (3 points, 5 points) in control group respectively, and all differences were statistically significant (t=-8.18, Z=-4.22, Z=-8.48; P<0.001). ④The incidence of amniotic fluid fecal contamination, fetal distress, Apgar score <10 points at 5 min after birth, and transfer to Department of Neonatology due to infection in fever group were significantly higher than those in control group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Delayed delivery can increase the risk of ELARIF, while ELARIF will lead to increased risk of intrapartum intervention and delivery. Clinicians should pay attention to the labor process management of ELA parturients. Once abnormalities are found, clinicians should timely take accurate and effective measures to promote the progress of labor process and reduce the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Key words: Analgesia, epidural, Analgesia, obstetrical, Fever, Labor pain, Pregnancy outcome, Cesarean section, Puerpera
表1 2组采取ELA产妇一般临床资料比较
组别 例数 年龄(岁，±s) 身高(cm, ±s) 分娩孕龄(周，±s) 流产次数[次，M(Q1，Q3)] 胎膜早破[例数(%)] BMI(kg/m2, ±s)
孕前 分娩时 孕期增加值
发热组 74 27.4±2.9 161.6±4.4 39.8±1.0 0(0，0) 15(20.3) 21.4±2.8 27.5±2.9 6.1±2.1
对照组 906 26.8±3.2 162.5±4.8 39.6±1.0 0(0，0) 232(25.6) 20.9±2.8 26.9±3.2 5.9±2.2
统计量   t＝-1.67 t＝1.58 t＝-1.43 Z＝-0.74 χ2＝1.03 t＝-1.24 t＝-1.44 t＝-0.48
P值   0.096 0.114 0.153 0.462 0.309 0.216 0.149 0.631
组别 例数 妊娠合并症[例数(%)] 感染高危因素[例数(%)] 分娩入院时血常规(±s)
妊娠期高血压 妊娠期糖尿病 上呼吸道感染 B族链球菌感染 白细胞计数(×109/L) 中性粒细胞百分比(%) 血红蛋白(g/L)
发热组 74 3(4.1) 16(21.6) 1(1.4) 0(0) 8.4±2.0 74.3±5.7 125.8±10.1
对照组 906 42(4.6) 124(13.7) 10(1.1) 16(1.8) 8.7±2.2 74.1±5.9 123.9±10.9
统计量   χ2<0.01a χ2＝3.52 —b χ2＝0.46a t＝1.37 t＝-0.23 t＝-1.46
P值   >0.999 0.061 0.380 0.499 0.171 0.816 0.144
表2 2组采取ELA产妇产时与产后相关资料比较
组别 例数 产程干预[例数(%)] 分娩方式[例数(%)] 第一产程时间(h，±s) 第二产程时间[h，M(Q1，Q3)]
人工破膜 ELARIF所致人工破膜 其他因素所致人工破膜 应用催产素 产钳助产 中转剖宫产
发热组 74 34(45.9) 4(5.4) 30(40.5) 48(64.9) 0(0) 20(27.0) 12.5±3.6 1.0(0.6，1.8)
对照组 906 278(30.7) 0(0) 278(30.7) 543(59.9) 22(2.4) 92(10.2) 9.8±3.5 0.7(0.5，1.1)
统计量   χ2＝7.34 —a χ2＝3.08 χ2＝0.69 χ2＝0.89b χ2＝19.24 t＝-5.50 Z＝-3.06
P值   0.007 <0.001 0.079 0.404 0.343 <0.001 <0.001 0.002
组别 例数 第三产程时间(min, ±s) 总产程时间[h，M(Q1，Q3)] 持续时间1c(h, ±s) 持续时间2d[h，M(Q1，Q3)] 产后发热[例数(%)] 24 h的产后出血量(mL, ±s) 顺产产妇PUR[例数(%)]e
顺产e 中转剖宫产f
发热组 74 7.7±4.6 13.5(11.1，16.0) 7.1±2.5 6.3(4.9，7.6) 4(5.4) 393.0±107.6 383.9±60.1 10(18.5)
对照组 906 7.8±4.5 10.5(8.0，13.2) 5.8±2.5 4.6(3.1，6.3) 36(4.0) 375.9±133.5 433.6±148.6 56(6.9)
统计量   t＝0.24 Z＝-5.74 t＝-3.70 Z＝-5.01 χ2＝0.09b t＝-0.93 t＝1.43 χ2＝4.75b
P值   0.812 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.769 0.353 0.156 0.029
组别 例数 产后出血[例数(%)] 顺产产妇产后48~72 h血常规( ±s)e 中转剖宫产术分娩产妇产后48~72 h血常规( ±s)f
顺产e 中转剖宫产f 白细胞计数(×109/L) 中性粒细胞百分比(%) 血红蛋白(g/L) 白细胞计数(×109/L) 中性粒细胞百分比(%) 血红蛋白(g/L)
发热组 74 8(14.8) 0(0) 11.5±2.6 77.6±5.2 109.6±12.2 12.4±3.1 82.7±4.7 113.1±10.0
对照组 906 79(9.7) 2(2.2) 11.4±2.2 76.5±4.9 109.9±13.4 12.5±2.5 81.5±4.5 109.5±12.1
统计量   χ2＝1.35 —a t＝-0.20 t＝-1.57 t＝0.12 t＝-0.65 t＝-1.04 t＝-1.23
P值   0.246 0.850 0.840 0.116 0.905 0.519 0.299 0.222
表3 2组产妇ELA相关资料比较
组别 例数 ELA药物用量(mL，±s) ELA持续时间[h，M(Q1，Q3)] ELA后一过性胎心减速[例数(%)]c 疼痛NRS评分(分)
顺产a 中转剖宫产b ELA前(±s) ELA后15 min[M(Q1，Q3)] ELA结束时[M(Q1，Q3)]
发热组 74 53.0±19.9 39.9±24.2 4.8(3.8，6.3) 5(6.8) 9.0±0.8 1(1，1) 6(5，6)
对照组 906 32.1±17.9 37.1±24.9 3.6(2.3，5.3) 33(3.6) 9.0±0.7 1(1，1) 4(3，5)
统计量   t＝-8.18 t＝-0.45 Z＝-4.22 χ2＝1.04d t＝0.21 Z＝-0.06 Z＝-8.48
P值   <0.001 0.651 <0.001 0.307 0.834 0.948 <0.001
表4 2组采取ELA产妇分娩新生儿相关资料比较
组别 例数 出生体重(kg/m2，±s) 羊水粪染[例数(%)] 胎儿窘迫[例数(%)] 新生儿窒息[例数(%)] 入住NICU[例数(%)]
发热组 74 3 472.1±364.3 23(31.1) 11(14.9) 0(0) 0(0)
对照组 906 3 410.5±364.3 191(21.1) 54(6.0) 4(0.4) 4(0.4)
统计量   t＝-1.40 χ2＝4.01 χ2＝7.38a —b —b
P值   0.162 0.045 0.007 0.730 0.730
组别 例数 Apgar评分[例数(%)] 转入新生儿科原因[例数(%)]
生后1 min<9分 生后5 min<10分 黄疸 感染 其他
发热组 74 6(8.1) 8(10.8) 3(4.1) 11(14.9) 5(6.8)
对照组 906 38(4.2) 42(4.6) 50(5.5) 64(7.1) 33(3.6)
统计量   χ2＝1.62a χ2＝4.19a χ2＝0.07a χ2＝5.89 χ2＝1.04a
P值   0.204 0.041 0.788 0.015 0.307
[1]
Fusi L, Steer PJ, Maresh MJ, et al. Maternal pyrexia associated with the use of epidural analgesia in labour[J]. Lancet, 1989, 1(8649): 1250-1252. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(89)92341-6.
[2]
Del Arroyo AG, Sanchez J, Patel S, et al. Role of leucocyte caspase-1 activity in epidural-related maternal fever: a single-centre, observational, mechanistic cohort study[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2019, 122(1): 92-102. DOI: 10.106/j.bja.2018.09.024.
[3]
Jansen S, Lopriore E, Naaktgeboren C, et al. Epidural-related fever and maternal and neonatal morbidity: a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Neonatology, 2020, 117(3): 259-270. DOI: 10.1159/000504805.
[4]
段然，曹珑璐，容俊芳，等. 硬膜外分娩镇痛产时产妇发热的病因分析研究进展：综述文献[J]. 中华疼痛学杂志，2020, 16(6): 523-528. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn.101379-20191206-00098.
[5]
Yin H, Hu R. Risk factors of maternal intrapartum fever and the effect of fever duration on neonatal morbidity in different temperature[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2022(2022-07-12)[2022-07-20]. DOI: 10.1111/jog.15362.(published online ahead of print).

URL    
[6]
严广斌． NRS疼痛数字评价量表numerical rating scale[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(3): 410-410.
[7]
Anim-Somuah M, Smyth RM, Cyna AM, et al. Epidural labor analgesia and maternal fever[J]. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2017, 60(2): 365-374. DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000270.
[8]
Sultan P, David AL, Fernando R, et al. Inflammation and epidural-related maternal fever: proposed mechanisms[J]. Anesth Analg, 2016, 122(5): 1546-1553. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001195.
[9]
Ren J, Wang T, Yang B, et al. Risk factors and safety analyses for intrapartum fever in pregnant women receiving epidural analgesia during labor[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2021, 27: 283-283. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.929283.
[10]
Neal JL, Lamp JM, Lowe NK, et al. Differences in inflammatory markers between nulliparous women admitted to hospitals in preactive vs active labor[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 212(1): 68.e1-68.e8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.050.
[11]
Chai J, Jia L, Cao H, et al. Association of lymphocyte count and incidence of maternal fever in epidural analgesia-involved labor[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2020, 8(23): 1584. DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-1724.
[12]
Sharma SK, Rogers BB, Alexander JM, et al. A randomized trial of the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis on epidural-related fever in labor[J]. Anesth Analg, 2014, 118(3): 604-610. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182a5d539.
[13]
Segal S, Pancaro C, Bonney I, et al. Noninfectious fever in the near-term pregnant rat induces fetal brain inflammation: a model for the consequences of epidural-associated maternal fever[J]. Anesth Analg, 2017, 125(6): 2134-2140. DOI: 10.1213/ANE0000000000002479.
[14]
Ren J, Wang T, Yang B, et al. Risk factors and safety analyses for intrapartum fever in pregnant women receiving epidural analgesia during labor[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2021, 27: e929283. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.929283..
[15]
贾瑞喆，樊晟，袁红梅，等. 椎管内分娩镇痛致阴道分娩产时发热的临床分析[J]. 实用妇产科杂志，2015, 31(9): 662-664.
[16]
Anim-Somuah M, Smyth RM, Cyna AM, et al. Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018, 5: CD000331. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000331.pub4.
[17]
高夏，苏晶晶，李韵，等. 椎管内分娩镇痛后发热患者的妊娠结局研究[J]. 实用妇产科杂志，2020, 36(5): 385-389.
[18]
徐静，武振芳. 硬膜外分娩镇痛相关产时发热的研究进展[J]. 中华围产医学杂志，2019, 22(11): 829-832. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2019.11.013.
[19]
Chai J, Jia L, Cao H, et al. Association of lymphocyte count and incidence of maternal fever in epidural analgesia-involved labor[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2020, 8(23): 1584. DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-1724.
[20]
张晓兴，罗琼，李琼珊，等. 分娩镇痛产妇第二产程时长对产后盆底功能影响的研究[J]. 浙江医学，2020, 42(10): 1048-1050. DOI: 10.12056/j.issn.1006-2785.2020.42.10.2019-1750.
[21]
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists′ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. ACOG practice bulletin No. 209: obstetric analgesia and anesthesia[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 133(3): e208-e225. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.00000000000003132.
[22]
林莉．连续硬膜外分娩镇痛相关产时发热对围产结局的影响[D].温州：温州医科大学，2017: 18-19.
[23]
Morton S, Kua J, Mullington CJ. Epidural analgesia, intrapartum hyperthermia, and neonatal brain injury: a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2021, 126(2): 500-515. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.09.046.
[24]
Burgess APH, Katz JE, Moretti M, et al. Risk factors for intrapartum fever in term gestations and associated maternal and neonatal sequelae[J]. Gynecol Obstet Invest, 2017, 82(5): 508-516. DOI: 10.1159/000453611.
[25]
Zhao B, Li B, Wang Q, et al. The relationship between epidural analgesia and intrapartum maternal fever and the consequences for maternal and neonatal outcomes: a prospective observational study[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2021: 1-9. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2021.1879042.
[26]
谢星，张丽芳. 椎管内分娩镇痛对足月初产妇产程进展及分娩结局的影响[J]. 现代妇产科进展，2018, 27(5): 375-376. DOI: 10.13283/j.cnki.xdfckjz.2018.05.014.
[1] Xialin Li, Fang He. Risk assessment and early warning system for postpartum hemorrhage[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 498-503.
[2] Ziyang Liu, Jianjian Cui, Yin Zhao. Current research status on obstetric disseminated intravascular coagulation and its scoring system[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 511-518.
[3] Fanying Zeng, Jie Ruan, Xinghui Liu, Guolin He. Current status of perinatal medicine advances under the new reproductive situation and coping strategies in prenatal care[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 519-524.
[4] Xiaofei Li, Hongli Liu, Qiuling Shi, Jing Tian, Li Li, Hongbo Qi, Xin Luo. A prospective randomized controlled study of low intensity focused ultrasound uterine involution treatment for prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage in natural childbirth women[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 534-539.
[5] Jiali Du, Rui Bao, Chunhong Qiao, Wei Han. Construction of a prediction model for adverse pregnancy outcomes after emergency cervical cerclage in pregnant women with cervical incompetence during the second trimester[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(04): 403-409.
[6] Xin Li, Yi Wei, Juan Zhang, Juanjuan Zhang, Xiufeng Ling, Chun Zhao, Mianqiu Zhang. Influencing factors on clinical pregnancy outcomes of frozen-thaw embryo transfer cycle in women of advanced age[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(03): 276-283.
[7] Hui Hua, Chenying Xu, Jinfeng Liu. Effect of pelvic floor muscle training timing on postpartum pelvic floor muscle tension and sexual function of elderly primiparae[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(03): 284-291.
[8] Jing Xue, Yanan Sun, Lili Zhu, Shuhong Li. Diagnosis and treatment of acute fatty liver during pregnancy and its pregnancy outcomes[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(03): 312-321.
[9] Yisi Chen, Min Liang, Hongyu Li, Xue Xia, Yanxi Liu, Chenqu Li, Dan Wang. Value of multidisciplinary team management in perinatal period for pregnant women with chronic kidney disease[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(02): 133-139.
[10] Ming Lu, Biying Zhang, Zhonghua Deng, Xiaoguang Li, Ning Shen. Application of scene teaching for standardized training of residents in fever clinics[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 388-391.
[11] Huihui Yu, Zongzhi Yin. Gastric perforation during pregnancy[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(04): 209-213.
[12] Shan Lu, Yunshan Yao, Seni Liao, Zien Chen, Yijian Zhang, Jianhao Lan, Wei Wei, Yanyang Liu, Yanhong Chen, Duijin Chen. Clinical study of 100 cases of suspected pregnancy complicated with acute appendicitis[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(04): 214-219.
[13] Wenyan Wang, Jianlan Zheng, Lici Zhu. Clinical study on the risk of pregnancy and perinatal period after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfe[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(04): 220-226.
[14] Miao Hu, Lili Du, Lizi Zhang, Lin Lin, Yuliang Zhang, Shifeng Gu, Zhongjia Gu, Siying Lai, Jingying Liang, Yu Liu, Minshan Huang, Yuanyuan Huang, Qingqing Huang, Shijun Luo, Dunjin Chen. A study on placenta accreta grading and perinatal outcomes in patients conceived through in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(03): 183-189.
[15] Hongrui Zhai, Shijian Zhou, Yunlong Zheng, Di Mu, Xiaobo Liu, Liang Lu, Jiandong Li, Xiaoxia Huang, Qiulan Chen, Yanping Zhang. Risk assessment and countermeasure on indigenous transmission of dengue fever caused by imported cases in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2024, 10(03): 165-172.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Copyright © Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Medical Multimedia Press  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号