Pain relief in hysterosalpingography

被引:21
作者
Hindocha, Akshay [1 ]
Beere, Lawrence [1 ]
O'Flynn, Helena [1 ]
Watson, Andrew [2 ]
Ahmad, Gaity [1 ]
机构
[1] Pennine Acute Hosp NHS Trust, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Manchester M8 5RB, Lancs, England
[2] Tameside & Glossop Acute Serv NHS Trust, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Ashton Under Lyne, England
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2015年 / 09期
关键词
Analgesia [methods; Analgesics; Non-Narcotic [therapeutic use; Opioid [therapeutic use; Hysterosalpingography [adverse effects; Infertility; Female; etiology; Nerve Block [methods; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Humans; METAL CANNULA; ANALGESIA; TRAMADOL; TRIAL; CREAM; BLOCK;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD006106.pub3
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is a method of testing for tubal patency. However, women struggle to tolerate the procedure, as it is associated with some discomfort. Various pharmacological strategies are available that may reduce pain during the procedure, though there is no consensus as to the best method. Objectives To compare the effectiveness of different types of pharmacological interventions for pain relief in women undergoing HSG for investigation of subfertility. Search methods This review has drawn on the search strategy developed for the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG). We searched the following databases to 15 April 2015: MDSG Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Selection criteria All identified randomised controlled trials investigating pharmacological interventions for pain relief during HSG were investigated for selection. Data collection and analysis Four review authors independently extracted data. We combined data to calculate mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I-2 statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main comparisons using GRADE methods. Main results The search identified 23 trials (1272 women) that were eligible for inclusion into the study. Oral opioid analgesia versus placebo/no treatment There was no evidence of effect for oral opioid analgesia in reducing pain during the procedure (MD - 0.91, 95% CI - 1.88 to 0.06, 1 study, n = 128, low quality evidence) or more than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -0.99, 95% CI - 1.75 to -0.23, 1 study, n = 128, moderate quality evidence) No studies reported on the effect of oral opioid analgesia, when taken prior to the procedure, in reducing pain within 30 minutes after the procedure There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions regarding adverse effects. Intravenous opioid analgesia versus placebo/no treatment There was evidence that intravenous opioids may improve pain relief during the procedure compared to no treatment (MD - 3.53, 95% CI -4.29 to -2.77, 1 study, n = 62, moderate quality evidence) No studies reported on the effect of intravenous opioid analgesia, when taken prior to the procedure, in reducing pain within 30 minutes and more than 30 minutes after the procedure In terms of adverse effects, one trial reported 1/32 participants had apnoea with intravenous remifentanil. Recovery time was nearly 4 minutes longer in the remifentanil group compared to the control. Oral non-opioid analgesia versus placebo/no treatment There was no evidence of effect for oral non-opioid analgesia in reducing pain during the procedure (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.23, 3 studies, n = 133, I-2 = 61%, low quality evidence), less than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.43, 2 studies, n = 45, I-2 = 97%, very low quality evidence), or more than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -0.36, 95% CI -1.06 to 0.34, 3 studies, n = 133, I-2 = 58%, low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions regarding adverse effects. Topical anaesthesia versus placebo/no treatment There was evidence that topical anaesthetics may reduce pain during the procedure (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.19, 9 studies, n = 613, I-2 = 66%, low quality evidence). There was no evidence of effect for topical anaesthesia, when applied prior to the procedure, in reducing pain less than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD 0.42, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.86, 5 studies, n = 373, I-2 = 59%, very low quality evidence). There was evidence of effect for topical anaesthesia, when applied prior to the procedure, in reducing pain more than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.38, 95% CI -3.44 to -0.68, 2 studies, n = 166, I-2 = 92%, very low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions regarding adverse effects. Locally injected anaesthesia versus placebo/no treatment There was evidence of effect that locally injected anaesthetic can reduce pain during the procedure (MD -1.31, 95% CI -1.55 to -1.07, 2 studies, n = 125, I-2 = 0%, very low quality evidence). There was no evidence of effect for locally injected anaesthesia, when applied prior to the procedure, in reducing pain less than 30 minutes after the procedure (MD -1.31, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.49, 2 studies, n = 125, I-2 = 46%, low quality evidence). No studies were included into the analysis of the effect of locally injected anaesthesia, when injected prior to the procedure, in reducing pain more than 30 minutes after the procedure. There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions regarding adverse effects. Any analgesic versus any other analgesic There was no evidence of a difference between the groups when oral non-opioid analgesia was compared to opioid analgesia for pain relief during the procedure (MD 1.10, 95% CI -0.26 to 2.46, 1 study, n = 91, low quality evidence); less than 30 minutes following the procedure (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.00 to 0.40, 1 study, n = 91, low quality evidence); and more than 30 minutes following the procedure (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.56 to 0.36, 1 study, n = 91, low quality evidence). Topical anaesthetics were found to be more effective than paracervical block for pain relief during HSG (MD -2.73, 95% CI -3.86 to -1.60, 1 study, n = 20, moderate quality evidence). This benefit did not extend to within 30 minutes following HSG (MD -1.03, 95% CI -2.52 to 0.46, 1 study, n = 20, low quality evidence); or 30 minutes or more after HSG (MD 0.31, 95% CI -0.87 to 1.49, 1 study, n = 20, low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions regarding adverse effects. Authors' conclusions Topical anaesthetic applied before the procedure may be associated with effective pain relief during HSG, though the quality of this evidence is low. Intravenous opioids may also be effective in pain relief, though this must be weighed against their side effects and their effects on the recovery time. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the efficacy of other analgesics for HSG, or to reach any other conclusions regarding adverse effects.
引用
收藏
页数:103
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Strategies to minimize discomfort during diagnostic hysterosalpingography with disposable balloon catheters: a randomized placebo-controlled study with oral nonsteroidal premedication
    Anserini, Paola
    Delfino, Francesca
    Ferraiolo, Antonella
    Remorgida, Valentino
    Menoni, Stefania
    De Caro, Giovanni
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2008, 90 (03) : 844 - 848
  • [2] Lidocaine-prilocaine cream as analgesia for hysterosalpingography: a randomized, double blinded, controlled study
    Arnau, Baldomero
    Jovell, Esther
    Romero, Marino
    Gonzalez, Manuela
    Esteba, Lola
    Garcia, Araceli
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2014, 182 : 216 - 219
  • [3] Randomized controlled trial of benzocaine versus placebo spray for pain relief at hysterosalpingogram
    Bachman, E. A.
    Senapati, S.
    Sammel, M. D.
    Kalra, S. K.
    [J]. REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2014, 28 (06) : 748 - 752
  • [4] Bello T O, 2008, Afr J Med Med Sci, V37, P157
  • [5] Opioid analgesia for hysterosalpingography: Controlled double-blind prospective trial with remifentanil and placebo
    Cengiz, Mustafa
    Kafali, Hasan
    Artuc, Hulya
    Baysal, Zeynep
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC AND OBSTETRIC INVESTIGATION, 2006, 62 (03) : 168 - 172
  • [6] Pain relief during hysterosalpingography: role of intracervical block
    Chauhan, Meenakshi B.
    Lakra, Pinkey
    Jyotsna, Dehlan
    Nanda, Smiti
    Malhotra, Vani
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2013, 287 (01) : 155 - 159
  • [7] Costello CF, 2005, FERTIL STERIL, V78, P1116
  • [8] Transcervical intrauterine topical local anesthetic at hysterosalpingography: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
    Costello, MF
    Horrowitz, S
    Steigrad, S
    Saif, N
    Bennett, M
    Ekangaki, A
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2002, 78 (05) : 1116 - 1122
  • [9] Evaluation of pain in three hysterosalpingography techniques: Metal cannula with and without paracervical blockage and balloon catheter
    de Mello, Joao F. L., Sr.
    Abrao, Mauricio S.
    Cerri, Giovanni G.
    de Barros, Nestor
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2006, 187 (01) : 86 - 89
  • [10] Paracetamol as a prophylactic analgesic for hysterosalpingography: A double blind randomized controlled trial
    Elson, EM
    Ridley, NTF
    [J]. CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2000, 55 (09) : 675 - 678