Comparative Study of Ropivacaine-Fentanyl Versus Bupivacaine-Fentanyl for Epidural Labour Analgesia -Prospective Randomised Control Study

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55489/njmr.160420261299

Keywords:

Epidural analgesia, Ropivacaine, Bupivacaine, Labor analgesia

Abstract

Background: Ropivacaine has emerged as a promising alternative to Bupivacaine as a local anesthetic for epidural labor analgesia. Ropivacaine had shown lesser cardiotoxicity and less intense motor block compared to bupivacaine which makes it safer to use in obstetric populations during labor. The purpose was to compare the efficacy, safety, and maternal satisfaction associated with the use of Ropivacaine with fentanyl and Bupivacaine with fentanyl as epidural block for inducing labor analgesia.

Methodology: A Randomized controlled trial following single blinding method was conducted with 120 patients who were in active labor with vertex presentation in the age group of 18 - 35 years. They were randomly divided into two groups of equal numbers and one group of patients received 10 ml of 0.125 % ropivacaine along with 2 mcg/ml fentanyl and the other group of patients received 10 ml of 0.125% bupivacaine analgesia along with 2 mcg/ml fentanyl. Sensory and motor block assessment was done using standard scales. Hemodynamic parameters, adverse events and their obstetric outcomes were recorded and compared.

Results: Onset of analgesia and the VAS scores at 15th and 30th mins were almost similar in both the groups p (>.05). The duration of analgesia was significantly higher among the ropivacaine group in comparison with bupivacaine (126.4 mins vs 103.2 mins). Motor block assessment was found to be slightly favourable for ropivacaine compared to bupivacaine but was not statistically significant (p=0.077). Hemodynamic parameters were found to be safe and similar in both the groups. Similarly, is the obstetric outcome and there were no adverse events reported among the two groups.

Conclusion: Epidural labor analgesia using similar concentrations of ropivacaine or bupivacaine in combination with fentanyl produced comparable analgesic outcomes. Ropivacaine showed a slight advantage in terms of longer duration of analgesia while preserving motor function.

References

1. Ranasinghe JS, Birnbach DJ. Progress in analgesia for labor: focus on neuraxial blocks. Int J Womens Health. 2010 Aug 9;1:31-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S4552 PMid:21072273 PMCid:PMC2971703

2. McAllister RK, Patel P. Bupivacaine. [Updated 2026 May 16]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2026 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532883/.

3. Owen MD, Dean LS. Ropivacaine. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2000;1(2):325-336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1517/14656566.1.2.325 PMid:11249552

4. Halpern SH, Walsh V. Epidural ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for labor: a meta-analysis. Anesth Analg. 2003;96(5):1473-1479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ANE.0000052383.01056.8F PMid:12707152

5. Gündüz Ş, Eriş Yalçın S, Karakoç G, Akkurt MÖ, Yalçın Y, Yavuz A. Comparison of bupivacaine and ropivacaine in combination with fentanyl used for walking epidural anesthesia in labor. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;14(3):170-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.87404 PMid:29085707 PMCid:PMC5651892

6. Meister GC, D'Angelo R, Owen M, Nelson KE, Gaver R. A comparison of epidural analgesia with 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor. Anesth Analg. 2000;90(3):632-637. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-200003000-00024 PMid:10702449

7. Chora I, Hussain A. Comparison of 0.1% ropivacaine-fentanyl with 0.1% bupivacaine-fentanyl epidurally for labour analgesia. Adv Anesthesiol. 2014;2014:237034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/237034

8. Guo S, Li B, Gao C, Tian Y. Epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl versus ropivacaine and fentanyl for pain relief in labor: a meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(23):e880. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000880 PMid:26061307 PMCid:PMC4616487

9. Finegold H, Mandell G, Ramanathan S. Comparison of ropivacaine 0.1%-fentanyl and bupivacaine 0.125%-fentanyl infusions for epidural labour analgesia. Can J Anaesth. 2000;47(8):740-745. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03019475 PMid:10958089

10. Bawdane KD, Magar JS, Tendolkar BA. Double blind comparison of combination of 0.1% ropivacaine and fentanyl to combination of 0.1% bupivacaine and fentanyl for extradural analgesia in labour. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2016;32(1):38-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9185.173350 PMid:27006539 PMCid:PMC4784211

11. Sánchez-Conde P, Nicolás J, Rodríguez J, García-Castaño M, del Barrio E, Muriel C. Comparison of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia during labor. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2001;48(5):199-203. PMID:11412729

12. Halpern SH, Breen TW, Campbell DC, Muir HA, Kronberg J, Nunn R, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing bupivacaine with ropivacaine for labor analgesia. Anesthesiology. 2003;98(6):1431-1435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200306000-00020 PMid:12766654

13. Merson N. A comparison of motor block between ropivacaine and bupivacaine for continuous labor epidural analgesia. AANA J. 2001;69(1):54-58. PMID:11759140

14. Lee BB, Ngan Kee WD, Ng FF, Lau TK, Wong EL. Epidural infusions of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for labor analgesia: a randomized, double-blind study of obstetric outcome. Anesth Analg. 2004;98(4):1145-1152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ANE.0000103264.71747.0F PMid:15041615

15. Beilin Y, Halpern S. Focused review: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for epidural labor analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(2):482-487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181e3a08e PMid:20529986

Downloads

Published

2026-10-01

How to Cite

Sureshbabu K, Sasirekha D, Manivannan P, Kayalvizhi P, & Shankar R. (2026). Comparative Study of Ropivacaine-Fentanyl Versus Bupivacaine-Fentanyl for Epidural Labour Analgesia -Prospective Randomised Control Study. National Journal of Medical Research, 16(04), 200–205. https://doi.org/10.55489/njmr.160420261299

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles