Paracervical block efficacy in office hysteroscopic sterilization: a randomized controlled trial. The use of intrauterine lidocaine to minimize pain during hysterosalpingography: a randomized trial. A double-blind randomized comparison of lidocaine and saline for cervical anesthesia. Paracervical block in incomplete abortion using manual vacuum aspiration: randomized clinical trial. Lidocaine spray and outpatient hysteroscopy: randomized placebo-controlled trial. Comparison of paracervical block techniques during first trimester pregnancy termination. The role and comparison of two techniques of paracervical block for pain relief during suction evacuation for first-trimester pregnancy termination. Four percent intrauterine lidocaine infusion for pain management in first-trimester abortions. Oral analgesia vs intravenous conscious sedation during Essure Micro-Insert sterilization procedure: randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.
To estimate the efficacy of paracervical block compared with saline for pain relief during office hysteroscopic sterilization.
                This study was a randomized, placebo-controlled study of women desiring hysteroscopic sterilization. A paracervical block of 1% lidocaine or normal saline was administered before office hysteroscopic sterilization. Patients and investigators were blinded to assignments. A pre hoc power analysis determined that 40 women would be required per arm to detect a difference of 0.9 cm on a visual analog scale. Pain was recorded on a visual analog scale at multiple procedure time points. Individualized standardized pain scores were constructed by weighted reporting of objective and subjective sensation.
                A total of 103 consecutive women were eligible, and 80 women were randomized, with 40 per group. Thirty-seven (93%) in each group had successful placement. The lidocaine group showed significantly lower pain scores for tenaculum placement (mean+/-standard deviation: 0.97+/-1.28 compared with 3.00+/-2.41, P<.001) traversing the external cervical os (1.46+/-1.71 compared with 3.77+/-2.68, P<.001) and internal os (1.79+/-2.11 compared with 4.10+/-2.77, P<.001). There was no significant observed difference with device placement in tubal ostium (3.15+/-2.69 compared with 3.74+/-2.73, P=.33). Multivariable linear regression analysis demonstrated a relationship of pain to procedural time (P=.047) and to group assignment (P<.01).
                Paracervical block with 1% lidocaine provides effective pain relief for cervical manipulations during office hysteroscopic sterilization, but does not reduce the pain associated with upper uterine/tubal manipulation when placing the devices.
                ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00811187.
                I. A hysterosalpingogram is an integral part of the evaluation of infertility but is often painful. Intrauterine anesthesia may help to alleviate the discomfort associated with this procedure.
                We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of intrauterine lidocaine in women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG). All women were instructed to take a nonsteroidal analgesic before the hysterosalpingogram. Patients received 3 mL of buffered 2% lidocaine solution or 0.9% normal saline instilled into the uterus before HSG. The primary outcome was the degree of pain experienced documented via 10-cm visual analogue pain scales. Systematic assessments of discomfort were also collected by the attending physician, radiology technician, and radiology physician.
                Sixty-four patients were randomly assigned to placebo and 63 women were randomly assigned to the lidocaine group. There were no differences in mean age, race, parity, or history of dysmenorrhea or chronic pelvic pain. There were no differences in the pain scores at baseline, during, or after the study procedure between the 2 groups. Peak pain scale scores associated with the procedure were 5.3 +/- 0.4 in both the placebo and study groups. In addition, assessments of patient discomfort revealed no significant differences between the 2 groups.
                We found no difference in pain between the intrauterine-lidocaine and placebo groups. Intrauterine lidocaine does not appear to be effective in decreasing pain in women undergoing HSG.
                I To compare bacteriostatic saline and buffered lidocaine for cervical anesthesia to blunt the reported pain during brief suction curettage.
                A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on women presenting for pregnancy termination procedures. Participants received either paracervical submucosal injections of bacteriostatic saline or 1% buffered lidocaine just before cervical dilation. Self-reported pain intensity was assessed at three time points during and 30 minutes after the procedure.
                Fifty-two of 135 eligible women presenting for pregnancy termination procedures participated in the study. Pain intensity ratings in lidocaine and saline treatment subjects did not differ significantly at any point. Our study had a power of 0.94 to detect more than a 15% difference on the 21-point box scale between the two solutions. Only one patient requested her block be repeated, and she had received lidocaine originally. Furthermore, of those women receiving lidocaine, 11% reported mild toxicity symptoms.
                To minimize lidocaine toxicity for a brief suction curettage procedure, bacteriostatic saline or very dilute lidocaine could be considered for the paracervical injection solution. The local anesthetic mechanism may be distention rather than blockage of specific autonomic nerves when there is no waiting period. This would mean that the term paracervical block could be changed to cervical anesthesia. To estimate the effectiveness of paracervical block in controlling pain among women treated with manual vacuum aspiration for an incomplete abortion
                A randomized clinical trial was conducted at Nuestra Señora de Altagracia, a maternal and perinatal referral hospital in the Dominican Republic. The sample size was based on a clinical difference of 1.5 points in the level of pain measured with the visual analog scale using 90% power and a sampling error of 0.04. Women who were at 12 weeks of gestation or less with an incomplete abortion were eligible to participate. They were randomly assigned to receive either the standard treatment of care (manual vacuum aspiration for uterine evacuation with psychological support but no paracervical block) or manual vacuum aspiration treatment with psychological support and paracervical block using 1.0% lidocaine. Patients with active infections, severe illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or allergies to lidocaine were excluded. Intraoperative pain as reported by the women and as documented by an external observer was measured.
                Although the paracervical block technique used showed a slight reduction in severe pain, there were no clinically or statistically significant differences in intraoperative pain between the 2 groups (relative risk 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.43, 1.23) with 50% of all patients registering 7 or higher score on a visual analog pain scale of 0-10. However, statistically significant differences were found in each group when comparing the level of preoperative and intraoperative pain described by the patient (P <.001). The manual vacuum aspiration technique and the paracervical block were not accompanied by complications.
                The paracervical block technique used in this study along with psychological support was comparable with pain control using psychological support alone; neither pain management regimen provided sufficient pain control. It is recommended that randomized comparative studies be designed to determine the effectiveness of other paracervical block techniques and the efficacy of the use of analgesics in patients suffering from incomplete abortion treated with manual vacuum aspiration. To assess the efficacy of lidocaine spray during outpatient hysteroscopy for reducing procedure-related pain and to identify risk factors for discomfort.
                One hundred twenty-one women were assigned randomly to have application of lidocaine spray or placebo to the uterine cervix during outpatient hysteroscopy. The main outcome measure was pain during hysteroscopy, assessed on a visual analog scale.
                There was no statistically significant difference between study and control groups in mean age, rate of nulliparity, postmenopausal state, need for cervical dilation, or percentage of women who used hormone replacement therapy. Indications for diagnostic hysteroscopy were similar between groups. Women in the lidocaine group had statistically significantly less pain during the procedure than women in the placebo group (2.2 +/- 1.9 and 3.7 +/- 2.5, respectively; P <.001). Women with abnormal uterine findings (submucous myoma, endometrial polyps, or intrauterine adhesions) had significantly higher pain scores than women with normal cavities (2.2 +/- 1.9 and 3.2 +/- 2.4, respectively; P <.002). Aerosol anesthesia and normal uterine findings were independently associated with less pain. No procedure had to be abandoned because of excessive pain or complications, and no women required hospitalization.
                Women treated with lidocaine spray had significantly less pain. Uterine cavity abnormality might be associated with a higher degree of pain during hysteroscopy. To determine whether variations in chloroprocaine placement in paracervical blocks influence effectiveness, whether chloroprocaine is superior to saline, and what factors influence pain perception.
                Eighty-two women undergoing first trimester aspiration abortions were randomized to receive 1% chloroprocaine or saline at 3-5-7-9 or 4-8 o'clock positions. Using a 0--10 scale, women rated anxiety, dysmenorrhea, and pain associated with laminaria insertion, paracervical block, and aspiration.
                All four groups were similar in medical and demographic characteristics. Injection position did not influence pain ratings, but women who received chloroprocaine had less pain than those who received saline (6.3+/-2.3 vs. 7.8+/-2.0, P=0.002). Paracervical pain and dysmenorrhea were independently associated with aspiration pain scores (respective regression coefficients 0.49 and 0.26, P<0.008).
                There is no advantage to using a four-site paracervical block over a two-site technique, but chloroprocaine is superior to saline. Paracervical block may not provide adequate anesthesia during first trimester abortion, especially for women with significant dysmenorrhea. This prospective study assessed the role and compared two techniques of paracervical block (PCB) for pain relief during suction evacuation for first-trimester termination of pregnancy following cervical priming with misoprostol. One-hundred and thirty-five women undergoing suction evacuation up to 12 weeks of gestation were randomized into three groups: (a) 5 mL of 1% lignocaine injected at the 4 and 8 o'clock positions of the vaginal vault; (b) 5 mL of 1% lignocaine injected at the 4 and 8 o'clock positions of the cervix and (c) no PCB. Pain scores during PCB, cervical dilatation and during and after suction evacuation were compared among the three groups. The sedation and satisfaction levels were also compared. There were no statistically significant differences in the pain levels during PCB, cervical dilatation and suction evacuation and in the satisfaction levels among the three groups. Patients with a lighter sedation level experienced more pain. In conclusion, PCB did not improve the pain levels during first-trimester suction termination of pregnancy after cervical priming with misoprostol and use of intravenous sedation, regardless of whether the local anaesthetic was injected into the cervix or the vaginal vault. To study the effects of a 4% intrauterine lidocaine infusion on perceived patient pain in first-trimester abortions.
                A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 80 women receiving either a 5-mL 4% lidocaine (n = 40) or saline (n = 40) intrauterine infusion and a standard paracervical block before first-trimester abortion. Women completed a series of 100-mm visual analog scales (anchors: 0 = none, 100 mm = worst imaginable) to measure their perceived pain (anticipated pain, after speculum insertion, after intrauterine infusion, after cervical dilation, after suction aspiration, and 30 minutes postprocedure). Eight women volunteered for serum lidocaine levels after the lidocaine infusion.
                Groups were similar in respect to age, parity, prior abortion, ethnicity, gestational age, and level of dysmenorrhea. Pain scores demonstrated a significant difference between groups during cervical dilation (saline 55 mm +/- 26, lidocaine 35 mm +/- 30, P < .01) and during aspiration (saline 71 mm +/- 20, lidocaine 43 mm +/- 30, P < .01). The lidocaine group reported significantly more symptoms (ie, oral numbness and tingling) than the saline group (saline 0/39, lidocaine 16/38, 42%, P < .01). The highest serum lidocaine level recorded was 4.0 microg/mL (lidocaine group). There was no difference in overall satisfaction between the 2 groups.
                Compared with paracervical block alone, the addition of a 4% intrauterine lidocaine infusion resulted in a significant reduction in patient perception of pain during first-trimester abortion. Although subjective symptoms of systemic lidocaine effect were common, no subjects demonstrated serum levels consistent with lidocaine toxicity. However, further studies to determine safety are needed.
                I. To compare the pain reported by patients during the Essure Micro-Insert sterilization procedure using either intravenous conscious sedation or oral analgesia.
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).
                Tertiary care ambulatory women's clinic.
                Eighty women of reproductive age women requesting permanent sterilization.
                Hysteroscopic placement of the Essure Micro-Insert permanent birth control system.
                Patients undergoing placement of the Essure Micro-Insert system for permanent contraception were randomized to receive either intravenous conscious sedation, oral analgesia, or placebo. During the procedure, pain scores were recorded using a visual analog scale. Patients in the oral analgesia group reported slightly more pain during insertion of the hysteroscope and placement of the second micro-insert; the groups were otherwise equivalent. They were also equivalent when all visual analog scale scores were combined.
                Oral analgesia is an effective method of pain control during placement of the Essure Micro-Insert permanent birth control system.
                Copyright Â© 2011 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The available literature is insufficient to determine the appropriate analgesia or anesthesia for sterilization by hysteroscopy. Compared to paracervical block with normal saline, paracervical block with lidocaine reduced pain during some portions of the procedure. Intravenous sedation resulted in lower pain scores during insertion of the second tubal device. However, neither paracervical block with lidocaine nor conscious sedation significantly reduced overall pain scores for sterilization by hysteroscopy.