Ayşe Güler1, H Güler Sahin1, Zehra Küçükaydın1, Evrim Erdemoğlu2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of paracervical block, intrauterine lidocaine and oral etodolac in decreasing the pain caused by pipelle endometrial sampling. A secondary goal of this study was to determine the adverse effects and compare possible effects of these methods on pulse and blood pressure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was performed between April 2006 and October 2006 in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Research Hospital. One-hundred twenty patients were randomized into four groups: 1. Group: Paracervical block was performed with 3 ml 2% prilocaine solution. 2. Group: Five ml of 2% lidocaine solution was instilled through the endocervix into the uterine cavity. 3. Group: Subjects received 400 mg oral etodolac tablet 1-1.5 hour before the procedure. 4. Group: No method of anesthesia was used in the control group. Endometrial sampling was performed with pipelle. Severity of pain during the procedure was scored by the subjects according to the "6-point Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)". Blood pressure and pulse rate were measured before, during and 30 minutes after the procedure. RESULTS:Pain scores in intrauterine lidocainegroup (2(nd) group) were found statistically significantly lower than the other three groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSION:Intrauterine lidocaine anesthesia technique decreases pain in endometrial sampling with pipelle more efficiently than paracervical block or oral etodolac. While indication of menorrhagia and endometrial thickness more than 5 mm increased pain scores, intrauterine lidocaine application or paracervical block decreased the scores significantly (p<0.05).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of paracervical block, intrauterine lidocaine and oral etodolac in decreasing the pain caused by pipelle endometrial sampling. A secondary goal of this study was to determine the adverse effects and compare possible effects of these methods on pulse and blood pressure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was performed between April 2006 and October 2006 in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Research Hospital. One-hundred twenty patients were randomized into four groups: 1. Group: Paracervical block was performed with 3 ml 2% prilocaine solution. 2. Group: Five ml of 2% lidocaine solution was instilled through the endocervix into the uterine cavity. 3. Group: Subjects received 400 mg oral etodolac tablet 1-1.5 hour before the procedure. 4. Group: No method of anesthesia was used in the control group. Endometrial sampling was performed with pipelle. Severity of pain during the procedure was scored by the subjects according to the "6-point Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)". Blood pressure and pulse rate were measured before, during and 30 minutes after the procedure. RESULTS:Pain scores in intrauterine lidocaine group (2(nd) group) were found statistically significantly lower than the other three groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Intrauterine lidocaine anesthesia technique decreases pain in endometrial sampling with pipelle more efficiently than paracervical block or oral etodolac. While indication of menorrhagia and endometrial thickness more than 5 mm increased pain scores, intrauterine lidocaine application or paracervical block decreased the scores significantly (p<0.05).