Literature DB >> 17197592

Intracervical block and pain perception during the performance of a hysterosalpingogram: a randomized controlled trial.

Randal D Robinson1, Yovanni Casablanca, Katherine E Pagano, Nancy A Arthur, G Wright Bates, Anthony M Propst.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether an intracervical block of 1% lidocaine decreased pain perception compared with placebo during the performance of a hysterosalpingogram.
METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 120 patients assessing pain perception during a hysterosalpingogram. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. Patients received either a 1% lidocaine intracervical block, an intracervical saline injection, or no injection. Visual analog (VAS) and qualitative scales were used to assess study participants' pain at six different time points during the hysterosalpingogram.
RESULTS: Subjects receiving the lidocaine block had significantly less pain (P<.001) by VAS during tenaculum placement (approximately 61% less, 1.303 cm) and with tenaculum traction (approximately 40% less, 2.804 cm) compared with both the intracervical saline injection group and the no injection group (tenaculum placement, 3.384 cm and 3.354 cm, and tenaculum traction, 4.705cm and 4.961 cm, respectively). There was no improvement seen with pain perception during instillation of the contrast in the lidocaine group compared with the saline or no injection group (P<.073). Subjects who received the saline injection had statistically more pain (P<.001) by VAS (2.647 cm) immediately after the injection compared with the lidocaine (approximately 79% greater, 1.476 cm) and no injection groups (115% greater, 1.232 cm).
CONCLUSION: Lidocaine intracervical block provides better pain relief than placebo during tenaculum placement and tenaculum traction during a hysterosalpingogram. This study suggests that patients should be offered an intracervical block before placement of the cervical tenaculum to decrease pain during the performance of a hysterosalpingogram. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), NCT00372658 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17197592     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000247645.52211.41

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  4 in total

1.  Randomized controlled trial of benzocaine versus placebo spray for pain relief at hysterosalpingogram.

Authors:  E A Bachman; S Senapati; M D Sammel; S K Kalra
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 3.828

2.  Comparison of four different pain relief methods during hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Bekir Serdar Unlu; Mehmet Yilmazer; Gulengul Koken; Dagistan Tolga Arioz; Ebru Unlu; Elif Dogan Baki; Cemile Kurttay; Osman Karacin
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.037

3.  Effectiveness of paracervical block for pain relief in women undergoing hysterosalpingography.

Authors:  Shikha Jain; Dattaprasad B Inamdar; Abha Majumdar; Deepak K Jain
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

4.  Comparison of pain and proper sample status according to usage of tenaculum and analgesia: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Cihan Comba; Gökhan Demirayak; Sakir Volkan Erdogan; Ibrahim Karaca; Omer Demir; Oguz Guler; Isa Aykut Ozdemir
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2020-06-19
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.