Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

IVF oocyte retrieval: prospective evaluation of the type of anesthesia on live birth rate, pain, and patient satisfaction

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Does the type of anesthesia (paracervical block (PCB) or general anesthesia (GA)) impact live birth rate, pain, and patient satisfaction?

Methods

A non-randomized prospective cohort study was conducted in women treated for IVF. Two groups of patients were prospectively included: the PCB group (n = 234) and the GA group (n = 247). The type of anesthesia was determined by the patients. The primary endpoint was cumulative live birth rate by OR. Secondary endpoints were self-assessment of the patients’ peri-operative abdominal and vaginal pain vs the doctors’ evaluations during PCB, post-operative abdominal and vaginal pain level, and patient satisfaction in both groups. Pain levels were assessed with a numerical rating scale (NRS).

Results

The live birth rate was similar in both groups (19.8% in the GA group vs 20.9% in the PCB group, P = 0.764). During oocyte retrieval in the PCB group, the physicians significantly under-estimated the vaginal pain experienced by the patients (3.04 ± 0.173 for patients vs 2.59 ± 0.113 for surgeons, P = 0.014). Post-operative vaginal and abdominal pain were significantly greater in the PCB group compared to the GA group (2.26 ± 0.159 vs 1.66 ± 0.123, respectively, P = 0.005, and 3.80 ± 0.165 vs 3.00 ± 0.148, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients were more significantly satisfied with GA than with PBC (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Because the LBR was similar in both groups and patient satisfaction was high, the choice of anesthesia should be decided by the patients.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wikland M, Enk L, Hamberger L. Transvesical and transvaginal approaches for the aspiration of follicles by use of ultrasound. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1985;442:182–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vlahos NF, Giannakikou I, Vlachos A, Vitoratos N. Analgesia and anesthesia for assisted reproductive technologies. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;105:201–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim WO, Kil HK, Koh SO, Kim JI. Effects of general and locoregional anesthesia on reproductive outcome for in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. J Korean Med Sci. 2000;15:68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Koninckx PR, Renaer M. Pain sensitivity of and pain radiation from the internal female genital organs. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1785–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ng EHY, Tang OS, Chui DKC, Ho PC. A prospective, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy of paracervical block in the pain relief during egg collection in IVF. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2783–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rodriguez CS. Pain measurement in the elderly: a review. Pain Manag Nurs. 2001;2:38–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: visual analog scale for pain (VAS pain), numeric rating scale for pain (NRS pain), McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ), short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), chronic pain grade scale (CPGS), short form-36 bodily pain scale (SF-36 BPS), and measure of intermittent and constant osteoarthritis pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:S240–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bourdel N, Alves J, Pickering G, Ramilo I, Roman H, Canis M. Systematic review of endometriosis pain assessment: how to choose a scale? Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21:136–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bümen S, Günüşen İ, Firat V, Karaman S, Akdoğan A, Göker ENT. A comparison of intravenous general anesthesia and paracervical block for in vitro fertilization: effects on oocytes using the transvaginal technique. Turk J Med Sci. 2011;41:801–8.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Christiaens F, Janssenswillen C, Steirteghem ACV, Devroey P, Verborgh C, Camu F. Comparison of assisted reproductive technology performance after oocyte retrieval under general anaesthesia (propofol) versus paracervical local anaesthetic block: a case-controlled study. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2456–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hammadeh ME, Wilhelm W, Huppert A, Rosenbaum P, Schmidt W. Effects of general anaesthesia vs. sedation on fertilization, cleavage and pregnancy rates in an IVF program. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1999;263:56–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tummon I, Newton C, Lee C, Martin J. Lidocaine vaginal gel versus lidocaine paracervical block for analgesia during oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1116–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Egan B, Racowsky C, Hornstein MD, Martin R, Tsen LC. Anesthetic impact of body mass index in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technologies. J Clin Anesth. 2008;20:356–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ng EHY, Miao B, Ho PC. Anxiolytic premedication reduces preoperative anxiety and pain during oocyte retrieval. A randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1233–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cerne A, Bergh C, Borg K, Ek I, Gejervall A-L, Hillensjö T, et al. Pre-ovarian block versus paracervical block for oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2916–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Frederiksen Y, Mehlsen MY, Matthiesen SMS, Zachariae R, Ingerslev HJ. Predictors of pain during oocyte retrieval. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;38:21–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ng EHY, Chui DKC, Tang OS, Ho PC. Paracervical block with and without conscious sedation: a comparison of the pain levels during egg collection and the postoperative side effects. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:711–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ben-Shlomo I, Moskovich R, Katz Y, Shalev E. Midazolam/ketamine sedative combination compared with fentanyl/propofol/isoflurane anaesthesia for oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1757–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Casati A, Valentini G, Zangrillo A, Senatore R, Mello A, Airaghi B, et al. Anaesthesia for ultrasound guided oocyte retrieval: midazolam/remifentanil versus propofol/fentanyl regimens. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1999;16:773–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Guasch E, Ardoy M, Cuadrado C, González Gancedo P, González A, Gilsanz F. Comparison of 4 anesthetic techniques for in vitro fertilization. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2005;52:9–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Trout SW, Hazard VA, Kemmann E. Conscious sedation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:799–808.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gohar J, Lunenfeld E, Potashnik G, Glezerman M. The use of sedation only during oocyte retrieval for in vitro fertilization: patients’ pain self-assessments versus doctors’ evaluations. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1993;10:476–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine, Pôle femmes parents enfants, AP-HM La Conception University Hospital, 147 bd Baille, 13005, Marseille, France

    Lucie Rolland, Jeanne Perrin, Valérie Pellegrin & Blandine Courbiere

  2. Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, Avignon Université, IMBE UMR 7263, 13397, Marseille, France

    Lucie Rolland, Jeanne Perrin & Blandine Courbiere

  3. Department of Gynecology, Obstetric and Reproductive Medicine, Laboratory of Medical Reproduction, CECOS, AP-HM La Conception, 147 bd Baille, 13005, Marseille, France

    Jeanne Perrin

  4. Research Unit EA3279, Department of Public Health, Aix Marseille Université, 13005, Marseille, France

    Virginie Villes

  5. Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine, Pôle femmes parents enfants, AP-HM Hopital Nord, Chemin des bourrely, 13015, Marseille, France

    Léon Boubli

Authors
  1. Lucie Rolland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeanne Perrin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Virginie Villes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Valérie Pellegrin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Léon Boubli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Blandine Courbiere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucie Rolland.

Ethics declarations

The French Ethical Committee of Research in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CEROG 2014-GYN-1105) approved this study. Each patient gave written informed consent prior to participating in the study.

Funding

None declared.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rolland, L., Perrin, J., Villes, V. et al. IVF oocyte retrieval: prospective evaluation of the type of anesthesia on live birth rate, pain, and patient satisfaction. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 1523–1528 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-1002-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-1002-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation