OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, acceptability, and economy of local anesthesia and intravenous (IV) sedation versus short-term general anesthesia for laparoscopic sterilization. METHODS: We randomly allocated 125 of 150 consecutively sterilized women to either local or general anesthesia. No women were excluded, but 25 chose not to participate. The women were interviewed before surgery, and they returned a standardized questionnaire after discharge from the hospital. All laparoscopic tubal sterilizations were performed by senior gynecologists. Midazolam was used as premedication. In the local-anesthesia group, lidocaine with adrenaline was infiltrated infraumbilically and bupivacaine was applied to each tube. Midazolam and alfentanil were used as IV sedation. In the general-anesthesia group, intubation anesthesia was accomplished with alfentanil and propofol; atracurium was used for muscle relaxation. RESULTS: In the local-anesthesia group, operation time was shorter, perioperative discomfort was modest, and the costs of equipment were lower than in the general-anesthesia group. There was less postoperative abdominal pain and less need of analgesics, and the patients were more awake in the evening. The rise in heart rate and blood pressure were higher in the local-anesthesia group, and external oxygen was necessary to avoid apnea. Anesthetic surveillance was therefore mandatory. CONCLUSIONS: Local analgesia was highly acceptable to the majority of patients as well as to the gynecologists. The operation time was less, postoperative recovery was quicker, and the women were less bothered by abdominal pain and sore throat. There was a substantial reduction in anesthesia costs. Anesthetic surveillance during surgery was necessary.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, acceptability, and economy of local anesthesia and intravenous (IV) sedation versus short-term general anesthesia for laparoscopic sterilization. METHODS: We randomly allocated 125 of 150 consecutively sterilized women to either local or general anesthesia. No women were excluded, but 25 chose not to participate. The women were interviewed before surgery, and they returned a standardized questionnaire after discharge from the hospital. All laparoscopic tubal sterilizations were performed by senior gynecologists. Midazolam was used as premedication. In the local-anesthesia group, lidocaine with adrenaline was infiltrated infraumbilically and bupivacaine was applied to each tube. Midazolam and alfentanil were used as IV sedation. In the general-anesthesia group, intubation anesthesia was accomplished with alfentanil and propofol; atracurium was used for muscle relaxation. RESULTS: In the local-anesthesia group, operation time was shorter, perioperative discomfort was modest, and the costs of equipment were lower than in the general-anesthesia group. There was less postoperative abdominal pain and less need of analgesics, and the patients were more awake in the evening. The rise in heart rate and blood pressure were higher in the local-anesthesia group, and external oxygen was necessary to avoid apnea. Anesthetic surveillance was therefore mandatory. CONCLUSIONS: Local analgesia was highly acceptable to the majority of patients as well as to the gynecologists. The operation time was less, postoperative recovery was quicker, and the women were less bothered by abdominal pain and sore throat. There was a substantial reduction in anesthesia costs. Anesthetic surveillance during surgery was necessary.