Carbon dioxide versus normal saline as distension medium for diagnostic hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Efficacy of Oral Nifedipine, Naproxen, or Placebo for Pain Relief During Diagnostic Hysteroscopy in an Office Setting: A Randomized Pilot Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare nifedipine, naproxen, or placebo for pain relief during diagnostic hysteroscopy.

DESIGN

Double-blind, randomized controlled pilot study.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS

Women scheduled for office diagnostic hysteroscopy (n = 60).

INTERVENTIONS

Women received nifedipine (2 tablets of 10 mg), naproxen (2 tablets of 250 mg), or placebo (2 tablets of 500 mg lactose) 30 to 60 minutes prior to hysteroscopy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled in the study (21 in the nifedipine group, 19 in the naproxen group, and 20 in the placebo group). The median pain scores during hysteroscope insertion, measured on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), were 1 (interquartile range (IQR) 0-0), 2 (0-4) and 1 (0-1) in the nifedipine, naproxen and placebo group, respectively (P,14). The median VAS scores during hysteroscopy were 5 (IQR 2-7), 5 (4-8) and 5 (3-7) in the nifedipine, naproxen and placebo group, respectively (P,73). The median VAS scores immediately after hysteroscopy were 2 (IQR 0-4), 3 (0-6) and 3 (1-5) in the nifedipine, naproxen and placebo group, respectively (P,40). The median VAS scores 30 minutes after hysteroscopy were 1 (IQR 0-2), 1 (0-1) and 1 (0-2) in the nifedipine, naproxen and placebo group, respectively (P,63). Hysteroscope insertion failed in 1 case (naproxen group) because of cervica`l stenosis (P,32). Flushes, fatigue and vertigo, 30 minutes after the procedure, were significantly more prevalent in the nifedipine group compared to the naproxen (p < .001, p,03, p,03, respectively) and the placebo group (p < .001, p,01, p,01, respectively). Palpitations occurred only in the nifedipine group (p < .001). The day after the procedure, the headache was most prevalent in the nifedipine group compared to the naproxen group (p,001) and the placebo group (p,001).

CONCLUSION

In our pilot study, pain relief and success rates for office diagnostic hysteroscopy were not significantly different between nifedipine, naproxen, and placebo. Nifedipine was associated with more, albeit tolerable, side-effects.

Clinical Issues - March 2023

Conversion to an open procedure Key words: laparoscopic procedure, open procedure, emergent conversion, open procedure cart, preoperative briefing. Excess absorption of fluid distension media Key words: fluid distension media, arthroscopy, transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, fluid extravasation, fluid intravasation. Hysteroscopic fluid deficit thresholds Key words: maximum fluid deficit, hysteroscopy, hypotonic solution, isotonic solution, distension media. Alternative insufflation gases Key words: carbon dioxide (CO2 ), nitrous oxide (N2 O), insufflation, gas distension media, pneumoperitoneum.

Pain Management during Office Hysteroscopy: An Evidence-Based Approach

Background and Objectives: Hysteroscopy is a reliable technique which is highly useful for the evaluation and management of intrauterine pathology. Recently, the widespread nature of in-office procedures without the need for anesthesia has been requesting validation of practical approach in order to reduce procedure-related pain. In this regard, we performed a comprehensive review of literature regarding pain management in office hysteroscopic procedures. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register), Global Health, Health Technology Assessment Database and Web of Science, other research registers (for example Clinical Trials database) were searched. We searched for all original articles regarding pain relief strategy during office hysteroscopy, without date restriction. Results have been collected and recommendations have been summarized according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) tool. Moreover, the strength of each recommendation was scored following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment (GRADE) system, in order to present the best available evidence. Results: Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for pain management are feasible and can be applied in office setting for hysteroscopic procedures. The selection of strategy should be modulated according to the characteristics of the patient and difficulty of the procedure. Conclusions: Accumulating evidence support the use of pharmacological and other pharmacological-free strategies for reducing pain during office hysteroscopy. Nevertheless, future research priorities should aim to identify the recommended approach (or combined approaches) according to the characteristics of the patient and difficulty of the procedure.

Uterine distension media for outpatient hysteroscopy

BACKGROUND

Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as carbon dioxide and liquid as saline that can be used at room temperature or warmed to body temperature. Both media offer advantages as well as disadvantages.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of gas (carbon dioxide) and liquid (normal saline) used for uterine distension during outpatient hysteroscopy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 28 April 2021. We checked references of relevant trials and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. CINAHL records and ongoing trials from the trial registries were included in the CENTRAL search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saline with carbon dioxide, as well as RCTs comparing saline at different temperatures, for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy done for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were patient tolerability and adverse events or complications related to the distending medium. Secondary outcomes were quality of the hysteroscopic view and duration of the procedure.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (1946 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high: the main limitations were risk of bias due to absence of blinding due to the nature of the procedure, imprecision, and inconsistency. Saline versus carbon dioxide Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in pain scores during the procedure between saline and carbon dioxide, but the quality of evidence was low (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.02; 9 RCTs, N = 1705; I² = 86%). This translates to differences of 0.39 cm (lower) and 0.05 cm (higher) on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Evidence was insufficient to show differences between groups in the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.42; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether saline decreases the need for analgesia compared to carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). Saline compared to carbon dioxide is probably associated with fewer vasovagal reaction events (Peto OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; 6 RCTs, N = 1076; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer shoulder-tip pain events (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 RCTs, N = 623; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 10% of women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy experience a vasovagal reaction event with the use of carbon dioxide, this rate would be between 3% and 9% with the use of saline. Similarly, if the rate of shoulder-tip pain with carbon dioxide is 9%, it would be between 1% and 5% with saline. We are uncertain whether saline is similar to carbon dioxide in terms of endometrial bleeding (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.75; 2 RCTs, N = 349; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Infection was not reported by any study in this comparison. Saline may result in fewer procedures with an unsatisfactory hysteroscopic view than carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82; 5 RCTs, N = 1082; I² = 67%; low-quality evidence). The duration of the procedure was shorter with saline in three of the four studies that reported this outcome, and duration was similar in both arms in the fourth study. Warm saline versus room temperature saline Use of warm saline for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy may reduce pain scores when compared with room temperature saline (mean difference (MD) -1.14, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.73; 3 RCTs, N = 241; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to show differences between groups in either the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.87; 1 RCT, N = 77; very low-quality evidence) or the need for analgesia (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.32; 1 RCT, N = 100; very low-quality evidence). Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in duration of the procedure between warm and room temperature saline, but the quality of evidence is low (MD 13.17 seconds, 95% CI -12.96 to 39.29; 2 RCTs, N = 141; I² = 21%). No cases of infection were reported in either group (1 RCT, N = 100). No other adverse events and no information on quality of the hysteroscopic view were reported by any study in this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to show differences between different distension media used for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy in terms of patient tolerability, operator satisfaction, or duration of the procedure. However, saline was superior to carbon dioxide in producing fewer adverse events (shoulder-tip pain and vasovagal reaction).

Office hysteroscopy safety and feasibility in women receiving anticoagulation and anti-platelet treatment

OBJECTIVES

More than 60,000 hysteroscopies are performed every year in the UK for common reasons such as heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) or postmenopausal bleeding. A significant number of women requiring hysteroscopy receive oral anticoagulants and there is often a reluctance to perform these procedures due to bleeding concerns.

STUDY DESIGN

We are presenting the first proof of concept cohort of patients undergoing minor hysteroscopic procedures while on anticoagulant or antiplatelet medication. A variety of minor procedures such as cervical dilatation, targeted endometrial biopsies, Pipelle endometrial biopsies and insertion or removal of intrauterine contraceptive devices were performed alongside hysteroscopy.

RESULTS

Completion of planned procedures was feasible in all women due to minimal bleeding despite the ongoing anticoagulation or anti-platelet treatment.

CONCLUSION

More research is needed to establish the safety of performing diagnostic and operative hysteroscopies without bridging or interrupting anticoagulation or antiplatelet treatment.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Type, Pressure, and Temperature of the Distension Medium on Pain During Office Hysteroscopy

OBJECTIVE

To identify the optimal distension medium type, pressure, and temperature to minimize pain during office hysteroscopy.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to January 29, 2020.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials in which women undergoing office hysteroscopy were randomized to either a distension medium type, pressure, or temperature against a suitable control, where pain was an outcome. Data regarding feasibility, visualization, complications, and satisfaction were also collected.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

The literature search returned 847 studies, of which 18 were included for systematic review and 17 for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in intraprocedural pain when comparing the use of normal saline against carbon dioxide (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.36 to 0.13). Subgroup analysis of high-quality studies revealed a statistically significant reduction in postprocedural pain with normal saline (SMD, -0.65; 95% CI, -1.14 to -0.16). Side effects were less frequent (Peto odds ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.20-0.40) and patient satisfaction was higher (SMD, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.51-2.28) with normal saline compared with carbon dioxide. Pressures of ≤40 mm Hg reduced intraprocedural pain (SMD, -0.67; 95% CI, -1.09 to -0.26) at the expense of a higher proportion of unsatisfactory views (81%-89% at ≤40 mm Hg vs 95%-99% at ≥50 mm Hg). Postprocedural pain was reduced with lower filling pressures. Warming saline did not reduce intraprocedural pain (SMD, 0.59; 95% CI, -0.14 to 1.33).

CONCLUSION

Normal saline, instilled at the lowest pressure to acquire a satisfactory view, should be used for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy to minimize pain.

Pain management for in-office hysteroscopy. A practical decalogue for the operator

Hysteroscopy is known to be the gold standard for evaluation of intrauterine pathologies, pre-menopausal and post-menopausal abnormal uterine bleeding and, in addition to this, it is a crucial examination in the infertility work-up. In-office operative hysteroscopy incorporates the outstanding possibility of seeing and treating an intracavitary pathology in the same examination, eliminating all the risk related to anesthesia and reducing procedure-related costs. By now, performing operative procedures in the office setting is recognized as feasible and safe. Over the last 20 years, many efforts have been made to implement the in-office operative approach worldwide. However, for some women, in-office hysteroscopy is still considered a painful experience, with reported discomfort at different steps of the hysteroscopic procedures. Moreover, uneventful and tedious sensations might be increased by a high level of anxiety for such examination. For this reason, despite the feasibility of the in-office approach, many clinicians are still afraid of provoking pain during the procedure and rather not to perform surgical procedures in the office, postponing the removal of the pathology in the operating room. To date, there is no consensus concerning pain management for in-office hysteroscopy and different approaches, pharmacological and non-pharmacological aids, as well as several procedural tips and tricks are utilized. Our purpose is to provide a feasible practical decalogue for the operator, to supply adequate management of pain during in-office hysteroscopic procedures, performing challenging operations, shrinking discomfort, aiming to upgrade both women's and operator's satisfaction.

Updates in office hysteroscopy: a practical decalogue to perform a correct procedure

Nowadays, hysteroscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis and treatment of intrauterine pathologies as it represents a safe and minimally invasive procedure that allows the visualization of the entire uterine cavity. Numerous technological innovations have occurred over the past few years, contributing to the development and widespread use of this technique. In particular, the new small-diameter hysteroscopes are equipped with an operating channel in which different mechanical instruments can be inserted, and they allow not only to examine the cervical canal and uterine cavity but also to perform biopsies or treat benign diseases in a relatively short time without anesthesia and in an outpatient setting. In this scenario, the operator must be able to perform hysteroscopy in the correct way to make this procedure increasingly safe and painless for the patient. This review aims to describe the ten steps to perform a correct office hysteroscopy, starting from patient counseling to the therapy after the procedure.

How the Location of Intracavitary Lesions Influences Pain during Office Hysteroscopy

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess how the location of intracavitary lesions during office hysteroscopy influences pain scores.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital das Forças Armadas, Lisbon, Portugal.

PATIENTS

Two hundred ninety-eight patients undergoing operative office hysteroscopy.

INTERVENTIONS

Pain intensity was assessed by patients using a numeric rating scale (0-10) 10 minutes after hysteroscopy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Statistical analysis assessed the association between pain score and clinical, obstetric, and gynecologic history. Associations with procedure-related factors were also assessed. Lesion location did not influence the perception of pain in the current sample. Hysteroscopic anesthesia allowed for a significant reduction in pain scores, regardless of lesion location. Multivariate analysis revealed that only the type of operative procedure and operating time significantly influenced pain scores.

CONCLUSION

Hysteroscopic anesthesia allows for a well-tolerated procedure, regardless of lesion location during office hysteroscopy. Lesion location should not be regarded as a technical limitation.

Pain relief for outpatient hysteroscopy

BACKGROUND

Hysteroscopy is increasingly performed in an outpatient setting. Pain is the primary reason for abandonment of procedure or incomplete assessment. There is no consensus upon routine use of analgesia during hysteroscopy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for pain relief in women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy, compared with placebo, no treatment or other pharmacological therapies.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2016 we searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP), together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing use of pharmacological interventions with other pharmacological interventions and pharmacological interventions versus placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcome was mean pain score.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 RCTS (3304 participants), of which only 19 reported data suitable for analysis. Most studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in most of the domains assessed. The evidence was low or very low quality, mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. Baseline pain scores were relatively low in all groups. Analgesic versus placebo or no treatment Local anaesthetics Local anaesthetics reduced mean pain scores during the procedure [(SMD) -0.29, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.19, 10 RCTs, 1496 women, I2 = 80%, low-quality evidence)] and within 30 minutes (SMD 0.50, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.33, 5 RCTs, 545 women, I2 = 43%, low-quality evidence). This translates to a difference of up to 7 mm on a 0-10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) during the procedure and up to 13 mm within 30 minutes, which is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. There was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups in mean pain scores after > 30 minutes (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.07, 4 RCTs, 450 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence), or in rates of vasovagal reactions (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.13, 8 RCTs, 1309 women, I2 = 66%, very low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference in rates of non-pelvic pain (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 5.80, 1 RCT, 99 women, very low-quality evidence). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in mean pain scores during the procedure (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.00, 3 RCTs, 521 women, I2 = 81%, low-quality evidence). Pain scores were lower in the NSAIDs group within 30 minutes (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.04, 2 RCTs, 340 women, I2=29%, low-quality evidence) and at over 30 minutes (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.05, 2 RCTs, 321 women, I2 = 78%, low-quality evidence). This equates to maximum differences of under 7.5 mm on a 0-10 cm scale, which are unlikely to be clinically significant. One RCT (181 women) reported adverse events: there was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in vasovagal reactions (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.94, very low-quality evidence). For other reported adverse events (non pelvic pain and allergic reactions) evidence was lacking. Opioids One RCT utilised sublingual buprenorphine and one utilised oral tramadol. Data on pain scores during the procedure were unsuitable for pooling due to inconsistency. Tramadol was associated with a benefit of up to 22 mm on a 0-10 cm scale (SMD -0.76, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.42, 1 RCT, 140 women). However, the effect estimate for this outcome for sublingual opioids did not support a benefit from the intervention (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.39, 164 women). Compared with placebo, the pain score within 30 minutes of the procedure was reduced in the tramadol group, with a difference of up to 17mm on a 0-10cm scale (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.23 , 1 RCT, 140 women, low-quality evidence. There was no clear evidence of a difference between the tramadol and placebo groups at over 30 minutes (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.16, 1 RCT, 140 women, low-quality evidence). Nausea and vomiting occurred in 39% of the buprenorphine group, and in none of the placebo group (OR 107.55, 95% CI 6.44 to 1796.46) Analgesic versus any other analgesic Some comparisons did not report pain scores at all time frames of interest, and none reported data on adverse events. One RCT (84 women) compared local intracervical anaesthesia versus combined intracervical and paracervical anaesthesia. Pain scores were higher in the group with local intracervical anaesthesia during the procedure (SMD 4.27, 95% CI 3.49 to 5.06, very low-quality evidence), within 30 minutes (SMD 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.05, very low-quality evidence) and at more than 30 minutes (SMD 3.47, 95% CI 2.78 to 4.15, very low-quality evidence). This translates to a possible benefit in the combined group of up to 12 mm on a 0-10 cm scale during the procedure. Benefits at longer follow-up were smaller. One RCT compared antispasmodic + NSAID versus local paracervical anaesthesia. Pain scores were lower in the NSAID group than in the local anaesthesia group (during procedure: SMD -1.40, 95% CI -1.90 to -0.91; >30 minutes after procedure: SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.33 to -0.41; 80 women, very low-quality evidence). This suggests a possible benefit of during the procedure of up to 23 mm on a 0-10 VAS scale and up to 11 mm >30 minutes after the procedure. Other comparisons included local intracervical anaesthesia versus combined intracervical, paracervical and topical anaesthesia, and opioid versus NSAIDs. Findings were inconclusive.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no consistent good-quality evidence of a clinically meaningful difference in safety or effectiveness between different types of pain relief compared with each other or with placebo or no treatment in women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy.

Pain during diagnostic hysteroscopy: what is the role of the cervical canal? A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether a correlation exists between the pain perceived during diagnostic anesthesia-free hysteroscopy and the characteristics of the cervical canal.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective observational pilot study of 255 women undergoing diagnostic hysteroscopy. Data analysis included characteristics of the patient and the cervical canal, and the pain experience during the procedure, assessed by visual analog score (VAS). A multiple logistic regression was then carried out in order to exclude confounding factors.

RESULTS

The degree of pain during hysteroscopy was equal to a median VAS score of 2 (range 0-10). Bivariate analysis between patients with VAS>3 and patients with VAS≤3 demonstrated a significant correlation between pain and the presence of synechiae in the cervical canal (P=0.022), the patient's age (P=0.003) and parity (P=0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of cervical synechiae (P=0.0001) [OR=4.99 (95% CI 2.13-11.70)] and parity (P=0.014) [OR=0.42 (95% CI 0.21-0.83)] were significantly correlated with pain. There was no significant correlation with the different angles of the cervical canal.

CONCLUSION

Cervical synechiae appear as a major factor influencing pain during hysteroscopy. While parity acts as a protective factor, the angle of the cervical canal does not seem to play an important role for pain during diagnostic hysteroscopy.