Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparing the efficacy of intrauterine lidocaine and paracervical block in decreasing the pain associated with endometrial biopsy: a randomised trial

  • General Gynecology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Almost 50 % of the patients experience moderate-to-severe pain during endometrial biopsy. The study aimed to examine the effectiveness of intrauterine lidocaine for relieving pain during endometrial biopsy.

Methods

A randomised trial was conducted in 120 patients undergoing endometrial biopsy. Sixty-seven women were assigned to the paracervical block group and 53 were assigned to the intrauterine lidocaine group. The main outcome measure was pain intensity, measured using the visual analogue scale, during and after the procedure.

Results

The groups were similar with regard to age, body mass index, gravidity, total number of previous vaginal deliveries, menopausal status, and uterine depth. The pain scores immediately after the procedure were similar in the groups (p = 0.079). However, the pain scores 30 min after the procedure were significantly lower in the intrauterine group than in the paracervical group (p = 0.0001).

Conclusions

Compared to paracervical block, intrauterine lidocaine may be the preferred anaesthesia for endometrial biopsy, and it does not cause any serious complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cooper JM, Erickson ML (2000) Endometrial sampling techniques in the diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 27:235–244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dogan E, Celiloglu M, Sarihan E, Demir A (2004) Anesthetic effect of intrauterine lidocaine plus naproxen sodium in endometrial biopsy. Obstet Gynecol 103:347–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Titapant V, Chawanpaiboon S, Boonpektrakul K (2003) Double-blind randomized comparison of xylocaine and saline in paracervical block for diagnostic fractional curettage. J Med Assoc Thai 86:131–135

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Glantz JC, Shomento S (2001) Comparison of paracervical block techniques during first trimester pregnancy termination. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 72:171–178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Sunaidi M, Tulandi T (2007) A randomized trial comparing local intracervical and combined local and paracervical anesthesia in outpatient hysteroscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:153–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Greeg RH (1981) The praxeology of the office dilatation and curettage. Am J Obstet Gynecol 140:179–185

    Google Scholar 

  7. Trolice MP, Fisburne C Jr, McGrady S (2000) Anesthetic efficacy of intrauterine lidocaine for endometrial biopsy: a randomized doublemasked trial. Obstet Gynecol 95:345–347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stubblefield PG (1989) Control of pain for women undergoing abortion. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 3:131–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wiebe ER (1992) Comparison of efficacy of different local anesthetics and techniques of local anesthesia in therapeutic abortions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 167:131–134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Miller L, Jensen MP, Stenchever MA (1996) A double-blind randomized comparison of lidocaine and saline for cervical anesthesia. Obstet Gynecol 87:600–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chanrachakul B, Likittanasombut P, O-Prasertsawat P, Herabutya Y (2001) Lidocaine versus plain saline for pain relief in fractional curettage: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 98:592–595

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zupi E, Luciano AA, Valli E, Marconi D, Maneschi F, Romanini C (1995) The use of topical anesthesia in diagnostic hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy. Fertil Steril 63:414–416

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cicinelli E, Didonna T, Ambrosi G, Schonauer LM, Fiore G, Matteo MG (1997) Topical anaesthesia for diagnostic hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy in postmenopausal women: a randomised placebo-controlled double-blind study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:316–319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Costello M, Horrowitz S, Steigrad S, Saif N, Bennett M, Ekangaki A (2002) Transcervical intrauterine topical local anesthetic at hysterosalpingography: a prospective randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Fertil Steril 78:1116–1122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Guney M, Oral B, Mungan T (2006) Efficacy of intrauterine lidocaine for removal of a ‘lost’ intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol 108:119–123

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Edelman A, Nichols MD, Leclair C, Astley S, Shy K, Jensen JT (2004) Intrauterine lidocaine infusion for pain management in first trimester abortions. Obstet Gynecol 103:1267–1272

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rattanachaiyanont M, Leerasiri P, Indhavivadhana S (2005) Effectiveness of intrauterine anesthesia for pain relief during fractional curettage. Obstet Gynecol 106:533–539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Grimes DA, Cates W Jr (1976) Deaths from paracervical anesthesia used for first-trimester abortion, 1972–1975. N Engl J Med 295:1397–1399

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors report no declaration of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huseyin Cengiz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cengiz, H., Dağdeviren, H., Kaya, C. et al. Comparing the efficacy of intrauterine lidocaine and paracervical block in decreasing the pain associated with endometrial biopsy: a randomised trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289, 609–614 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3036-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3036-0

Keywords

Navigation