Evaluation of pain in three hysterosalpingography techniques: Metal cannula with and without paracervical blockage and balloon catheter

被引:19
作者
de Mello, Joao F. L., Sr.
Abrao, Mauricio S.
Cerri, Giovanni G.
de Barros, Nestor
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, BR-05351025 Sao Paulo, Brazil
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Med, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, Sao Paulo, Brazil
关键词
balloon catheter; hysterosalpingography; infertility; metal cannula; pain management; paracervical blockage; pelvic imaging;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.05.0392
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to assess discomfort or pain in patients undergoing hysterosalpingography using three different techniques. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Eighty-nine patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. In group 1, 30 patients underwent the technique performed with a metal cannula without anesthetic; in group 2, 29 patients underwent the technique performed with a metal cannula with previous paracervical anesthetic block; in group 3, 30 patients submitted to the procedure performed with a flexible balloon catheter. Each patient completed two questionnaires, Q1 and Q2: Q1 assessed their personal, clinical, and surgical history, and Q2 provided the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain assessment. The investigator also evaluated discomfort at each potentially painful stage of the procedure based on the patient's verbal expression, physical manifestations, or both. RESULTS. In terms of global discomfort experienced during hysterosalpingography, group I had the highest mean VAS score, whereas scores did not significantly differ between groups 2 and 3. During cervical grasping, group 2 experienced less discomfort than group 1. A comparison of pain associated with cervical grasping and balloon inflation (group 3 only) revealed that the highest levels of discomfort occurred during cervical grasping without anesthesia (group 1), followed by balloon inflation inside the cervix (group 3), and, last, cervical grasping after paracervical block (group 2). CONCLUSION. Performing hysterosalpingography with a flexible balloon catheter or metal cannula with previous paracervical block produced similar levels of pain; however, both techniques appear to be more comfortable than the traditional technique (i.e., metal cannula without anesthesia).
引用
收藏
页码:86 / 89
页数:4
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] Evaluation of outpatient hysteroscopy, saline infusion hysterosonography, and hysterosalpingography in infertile women: a prospective, randomized study
    Brown, SE
    Coddington, CC
    Schnorr, J
    Toner, JP
    Gibbons, W
    Oehninger, S
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2000, 74 (05) : 1029 - 1034
  • [2] Tolerability of the mini-pan-endoscopic approach (transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy and minihysteroscopy) versus hysterosalpingography in an outpatient infertility investigation
    Cicinelli, E
    Matteo, M
    Causio, F
    Schonauer, LM
    Pinto, V
    Galantino, P
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2001, 76 (05) : 1048 - 1051
  • [3] Comparison of cervical vacuum cup cannula with metal cannula for hysterosalpingography
    Cohen, SB
    Wattiez, A
    Seidman, DS
    Lidor, AL
    Hendler, I
    Rabinovichi, J
    Goldenberg, M
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2001, 108 (10): : 1031 - 1035
  • [4] EZEH UO, 1995, FERTIL STERIL, V64, P221
  • [5] Practice patterns among reproductive endocrinologists: The infertility evaluation
    Glatstein, IZ
    Harlow, BL
    Hornstein, MD
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 1997, 67 (03) : 443 - 451
  • [6] HUSKISSON EC, 1974, LANCET, V2, P1127, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(74)90884-8
  • [7] Pimenta C A, 1998, Rev Esc Enferm USP, V32, P179
  • [8] Paracervical block for labor analgesia: A brief historic review
    Rosen, MA
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 186 (05) : S127 - S130
  • [9] Rosner B, 1986, FUNDAMENTALS BIOSTAT
  • [10] A comparison of pain tolerance during X-ray hysterosalpingography and sonohysterosalpingography
    Session, DR
    Lee, GS
    Kelly, AC
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC AND OBSTETRIC INVESTIGATION, 1997, 43 (02) : 116 - 119