Email this article Failed labour epidural analgesia: mechanisms, risk factors and stepwise management: Guideline-based review
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20528/cjpm.2026.01.005
View Counter: Abstract | 111 times | ‒ Full Article | 27 times |
Full Text:
PDFAbstract
Bacgkround: Epidural analgesia is the most widely used neuraxial technique for labour pain management; however, inadequate or failed analgesia remains a frequent and clinically relevant problem. This review aims to summarise the mechanisms and risk factors associated with failed labour epidural analgesia and to present a stepwise management approach aligned with current European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) guidance.
Methods: A review of clinical guidelines, observational studies and interventional trials addressing labour epidural failure, breakthrough pain and rescue strategies was performed.
Results: Failed labour epidural analgesia is a multifactorial condition involving catheter-related issues such as suboptimal insertion depth, migration, unilateral or patchy block and unintended catheter placement, in addition to maternal, obstetric and operator-related factors. Effective management requires structured reassessment of pain characteristics, labour progression, sensory block level, catheter position and infusion parameters. Stepwise rescue strategies, including catheter manipulation, patient repositioning and adjustment of local anaesthetic dosing, may restore analgesic efficacy. Persistent inadequacy necessitates timely senior review and early consideration of catheter re-siting or alternative neuraxial techniques.
Conclusions: Early recognition and structured, stepwise management are essential for the effective treatment of failed labour epidural analgesia. Adherence to evidence-based guidelines, optimization of technical practice and appropriate organisational support may reduce failure rates and improve maternal outcomes.
Keywords
References
World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience, 2018.
Coviello A, Iacovazzo C, Frigo MG, et al. Technical aspects of neuraxial analgesia during labor and maternity care: an updated overview. J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2025;5(1):6.
Guasch E, Brogly N, Gilsanz F. Combined spinal epidural for labour analgesia and caesarean section:indications and recommendations. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2020;33:284–290.
Yin H, Tong X, Huang H. Dural puncture epidural versus conventional epidural analgesia for labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. J Anesth. 2022;36:413–427
Pan PH, Bogard TD, Owen MD. Incidence and characteristics of failures in obstetric neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of19,259 deliveries. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2004;13:227–233.
Sng BL, Tan M, Yeoh CJ, et al. Incidence and risk factors for epidural re-siting in parturients with breakthrough pain during labour epidural analgesia: a cohort study. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2018;34:28-36.
Tan HS, Sng BL, Sia ATH. Reducing breakthrough pain during labour epidural analgesia: an update. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2019;32(3):307-314.
Odor PM, Bampoe S, Hayward J, Chis Ster I, Evans E. Intrapartum epidural fixation methods: a randomised controlled trial of three different epidural catheter securement devices. Anaesthesia. 2016;71(3):298-305.
Brogly N, Valbuena Gómez I, Afshari A, et al. ESAIC focused guidelines for the management of the failing epidural during labour epidural analgesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2025;42(2):96-112.
Guasch E, Iannuccelli F, Brogly N, Gilsanz F. Failed epidural for labor: what now?. Minerva Anestesiol. 2017;83(11):1207-1213.
Thangamuthu A, Russell IF, Purva M. Epidural failure rate using a standardised definition. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2013;22(4):310-315.
Agaram R, Douglas MJ, McTaggart RA, Gunka V. Inadequate pain relief with labor epidurals: a multivariate analysis of associated factors. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2009;18:10–14.
Hermanides J, Hollmann MW, Stevens MF, et al. Failed epidural: causes and management. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:144–154.
Hess PE, Pratt SD, Lucas TP, et al. Predictors of breakthrough pain during labor epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2001;93:414–418.
Sng BL, Zhang Q, Leong WL, et al. Incidence and characteristics of break-through pain in parturients using computer-integrated patient-controlled epidural analgesia. J Clin Anesth. 2015;27:277–284.
Uyl N, de Jonge E, Uyl-de Groot C, van der Marel C, Duvekot J. Difficult epidural placement in obese and non-obese pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obstet. 2019;40:52–56.
Bucstain C, Garmi G, Zafran N, Zuarez-Easton S, Carmeli J, Salim R. Risk factors and peripartum outcomes of failed epidural: a prospective cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;295(5):1119–1125.
Merrer J, Bonnet MP, Blondel B, Tafflet M, Khoshnood B, Le Ray C, Chantry AA. Predictors of incomplete maternal satisfaction with neuraxial labor analgesia: A nationwide study. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2021;40(5):100939.
Guasch E, Brogly N, Gilsanz F. Combined spinal epidural for labour analgesia and caesarean section: indications and recommendations. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2020;33(3):284–290
Yin H, Tong X, Huang H. Dural puncture epidural versus conventional epidural analgesia for labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. J Anesth. 2022;36(3):413–427.
Lin W, Yang Y, Lin J, Chen J, Lin Q. Dural puncture epidural with 25-G spinal needles versus conventional epidural technique in conjunction with PIEB for labor analgesia: A randomized trial. J Pain Res. 2023;16:3797–3805.
Chan JJI, Gan YY, Dabas R, Han NR, Sultana R, Sia ATH, Sng BL. Evaluation of association factors for labor episodic pain during epidural analgesia. J Pain Res. 2019;12:679–687.
Kallidaikurichi Srinivasan K, Gallagher A, O'Brien N, Sudir V, Barrett N, O'Connor R, Holt F, Lee P, O'Donnell B, Shorten G. Proficiency-based progression training: an 'end to end' model for decreasing error applied to achievement of effective epidural analgesia during labour: a randomised control study. BMJ Open. 2018;8(10):e020099.
