Intrauterine lidocaine infusion for pain relief during saline solution infusion sonohysterography: a randomized, controlled trial

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Pharmacological Strategies and Further Measures for Pain Relief during Hysterosonosalpingography: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for pain relief in women during contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the assessment of tubal patency and uterine disease, compared with placebo or no intervention. In December 2021, we searched the electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Sciencedirect, the Cochrane library and Clinicaltrials.gov) without date restriction: We identified 10 randomized control trials (RCTs) (2098 women) eligible for this systematic review, after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among these, five studies compared the use of painkillers with the placebo, two studies compared different catheter positions in the cervix or in the uterine cavity, and two others considered different temperatures of the contrast medium, as a method to reduce pain. Topical lidocaine applied before the procedure may be associated with effective pain relief during hysterosonography, though the quality of this evidence is low. New echogenic contrast agents and their temperature at 37 °C ensure a less painful procedure. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the efficacy of other analgesics or strategies.

Analgesic Efficacy of Intrauterine Lidocaine Flushing in Hysterosalpingo-foam Sonography: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of flushing the uterine cavity with lidocaine before hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) to reduce procedure-related pain.

DESIGN

A double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Medical Center, Israel between June 2020 and September 2020 involving 80 women undergoing a HyFoSy procedure.

SETTING

University-affiliated medical center.

PATIENTS

A total of 40 women were assigned randomly to the lidocaine group and 40 to the saline (placebo) group using a predetermined randomization code. Intrauterine instillation before the procedure consisting of either lidocaine 2% or normal saline alone was conducted, respectively.

INTERVENTIONS

The primary outcome measure was the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score during the phase of intrauterine foam instillation reported by the women after the procedure. The VAS consisted of a 10-cm line ranging from 0 to 10 (anchored by 0 = no pain and 10 = very severe pain). On the basis of the VAS scores, the pain level ratings were classified as mild (rated 1-3), moderate (4-6), or severe (7-10).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The patient characteristics and obstetric data were found to be similar in both groups. Comparison of the VAS pain scores experienced during the procedure showed that women in the lidocaine flushing group rated the procedure less painful than the women in the saline group (3.0 ± 1.3 vs 6.3 ± 1.5, respectively; p = .001). The incidence of severe pain was significantly lower in the lidocaine group than the saline group (2.5% and 45.0%, respectively, p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine flushing of the uterine cavity before HyFoSy significantly decreased the pain known to be caused by this procedure and had the advantage of no side effects. It is easily applied, relatively inexpensive, and may affect compliance with this procedure.

Transvaginal four-dimensional hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography: Pain perception and factors influencing pain severity

AIM

The purpose is to investigate pain perception during transvaginal four-dimensional hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (TV 4D-HyCoSy) and factors influencing pain severity.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study included 340 women who underwent TV 4D-HyCoSy examination from January 2016 to October 2017. The factors were recorded, including age, childbearing history, infertility type, history of pelvic inflammation, pelvic surgery, history of uterine manipulation, history of ectopic pregnancy, atropine delivery mode, uterine position, uterine malformation, uterine lesion, fibroid, intrauterine adhesion, polycystic ovary, endometrial implantation cyst, dysmenorrhea score, the degree of patency of fallopian tube and contrast agents dosage. Pain was evaluated during and after TV 4D-HyCoSy. The time point of peak pain was evaluated and the influencing factors of moderate/severe pain were analyzed.

RESULTS

The highest pain occurred at contrast instillation. The independent influencing factors of moderate/severe pain were age (P = 0.021), dysmenorrhea score (P = 0.003) and tubal patency (P < 0.001). Further analysis showed that age affected the pain score when TV 4D-HyCoSy started and the peak pain occurred. Dysmenorrhea score and tubal patency affect the pain score at most time points.

CONCLUSION

Age, dysmenorrhea score and tubal patency are factors influencing the severity of pain during TV 4D-HyCoSy.

Pain management during diagnostic office hysteroscopy in postmenopausal women: a randomized study

Objective: This study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of lidocaine versus tramadol versus placebo in reducing the pain of diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy (OH) in postmenopausal women.Materials and methods: This randomized double-blinded study included 156 menopausal women who received intrauterine lidocaine infusion or oral tramadol (50 mg) or placebo before diagnostic OH (52 women/group). Primary outcome was pain severity during the procedure using a 10-cm visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes were pain scores 10 and 30 min post procedure, satisfaction level, and ease of cervical entry.Results: Lidocaine had lower pain scores compared to placebo during and 10 min after the procedure (p < 0.001). Tramadol had lower pain scores than placebo during the procedure (p = 0.04), 10 min after the procedure (p = 0.03), and 30 min after the procedure (p = 0.04). Both lidocaine and tramadol resulted in an easier procedure than placebo (p < 0.001 and p = 0.04, respectively). Lidocaine had an easier cervical entry compared to tramadol (p = 0.004). Satisfaction scores in the lidocaine and tramadol groups were significantly higher than in the placebo group (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Lidocaine and tramadol were effective in reducing postmenopausal women-reported pain during and after diagnostic OH. However, lidocaine was better than tramadol in facilitating hysteroscope passage through the cervical canal and the reduction in pain levels with lidocaine was clinically relevant.Trial registration number: NCT03701984.

The value of endocervical and endometrial lidocaine flushing before office hysteroscopy: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of flushing the cervical canal and the uterine cavity with local anesthetic in order to reduce the pain felt by patients during office hysteroscopy.

METHODS

A double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted between May 1, 2018, and February 28, 2019, involving 260 women undergoing office hysteroscopy at Kasr Al Ainy Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. Women were randomized using a computerized random number generator to intrauterine and intracervical instillation 5 minutes before the procedure of either 5 mL lidocaine 2% diluted in 15 mL normal saline, or 20 mL normal saline alone. The primary outcome measure was the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score reported by women during the procedure. Secondary outcomes included VAS score at 10 and 30 minutes after the procedure, the need for analgesia, and occurrence of vasovagal attacks.

RESULTS

Women in the lidocaine flushing group reported a significantly lower VAS score during the procedure (1.8 ± 1.1 vs 5.2 ± 1.8) and 10 and 30 minutes after it (1.3 ± 1.15 and 0.8 ± 0.9 vs 4.3 ± 2.1 and 2.98 ± 1.96) when compared with control women (P<0.001). More women without lidocaine flushing experienced vasovagal attacks (25/130 vs 9/130, P<0.001) and needed analgesia (84/130 vs 13/130, P<0.001) when compared with women with lidocaine flushing.

CONCLUSION

Flushing of the cervical canal and uterine cavity with local anesthetic significantly decreased pain sensation in women undergoing office hysteroscopy. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03530488.

Intrauterine lidocaine and naproxen for analgesia during intrauterine device insertion: randomized controlled trial

Background

This study evaluates oral naproxen and intrauterine instillation of lidocaine for analgesia with intrauterine device (IUD) placement as compared to placebo.

Methods

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients desiring levonorgestrel 52 mg IUD or Copper T380A IUD were randomized into treatment groups. Patients received either oral naproxen 375 mg or placebo approximately 1 h prior to procedure in conjunction with 5 mL of 2% lidocaine or 5 mL of intrauterine saline. The primary outcome was pain with IUD insertion measured on a visual analog scale immediately following the procedure. Prespecified secondary outcomes included physician pain assessment, post procedure analgesia, satisfaction with procedure, satisfaction with IUD, and pain assessment related to IUD type.

Results

From June 4, 2014 to October 28, 2016 a total of 160 women desiring Copper T380A or levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device insertion and meeting study criteria were enrolled and randomized in the study. Of these, 157 (78 in the Copper T380A arm, 79 in the levonorgestrel 52 mg) received study treatment medication. There were 39 in naproxen/lidocaine arm, 39 in placebo/lidocaine arm, 40 in naproxen/placebo arm, and 39 in placebo/placebo arm. There were no differences in the mean pain scores for IUD placement between treatment groups (naproxen/lidocaine 3.38 ± 2.49; lidocaine only 2.87 ± 2.13; naproxen only 3.09 ± 2.18; placebo 3.62 ± 2.45). There was no difference in self-medication post procedure or in satisfaction with the procedure and IUD among women in the treatment arms or by type of IUD.

Conclusion

Naproxen with or without intrauterine lidocaine does not reduce pain with IUD placement.

Clinical trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02769247. Registered May 11, 2016, Retrospectively registered.

Clinical Aspects of HyFoSy as Tubal Patency Test in Subfertility Workup

BACKGROUND

Tubal patency testing is an essential part of female subfertility evaluation. Traditionally, hysterosalpingography (HSG) was the first step to evaluate tubal patency. However, during the past decade Hysterosalpingo-Contrast Sonography (HyCoSy) was introduced in order to avoid radiation exposure and Hysterosalpingo-Foam Sonography (HyFoSy) has been developed as a safe and less painful alternative.

OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE

The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the currently available HyFoSy literature and related clinical aspects.

SEARCH METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase from the introduction of HyFoSy to March 2019. Unfortunately, a meta-analysis was not possible due to a too small number of studies, being mutually incomparable for the various subjects of clinical aspects, even for the reliability as a test for tubal patency.

OUTCOMES

Nine small studies concluded that the accuracy and effectiveness as a test for tubal patency of 2D- and 3D-HyFoSy are comparable or even better than HSG or HyCoSy. With or without using Doppler techniques, 3D-HyFoSy does not seem to offer benefits above real-time 2D-HyFoSy. Five studies reported on pain and discomfort during HyFoSy, concluding that HyFoSy is a well-tolerated, less painful procedure compared to HSG, without a need for the use of analgesics. There are suggestions about an increased pregnancy rate in the first three cycles after the procedure but in no studies pregnancy outcome after HyFoSy was compared with other or no intervention.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

HyFoSy is a promising and safe alternative for HSG with regard to accuracy and effectiveness. HyFoSy lacks radiation and iodine exposure and is a well-tolerated and less painful procedure than HSG, without the need for analgesics. However more research is needed to make clear statements regarding a therapeutic effect of HyFoSy.

Cytotoxicity and cellular response mechanisms of water-soluble platinum(II) complexes of lidocaine and phenylcyanamide derivatives

Three new platinum(II) complexes of lidocaine and phenylcyanamide derivative ligands of formula K[Pt(3,5-(NO₂)₂pcyd)₂(LC)], 1, K[Pt(3,5-(CF₃)₂pcyd)₂(LC)], 2, K[Pt(3,5-Cl₂pcyd)₂(LC)], 3 (LC: lidocaine, 3,5-(NO₂)₂pcyd: 3,5-dinitro phenylcyanamide, 3,5-(CF₃)₂pcyd: 3,5-bis(trifluoromethyl) phenylcyanamide, 3,5-Cl₂pcyd: 3,5-dichloro phenylcyanamide) have been synthesized and fully characterized. Cellular uptake, DNA platination and cytotoxicity against a panel of human tumor cell lines were evaluated. The complexes 1-3 revealed a significant in vitro antiproliferative activity against human ovarian carcinoma (A2780), colorectal adenocarcinoma (HT29), breast (MCF-7), liver hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG-2) and lung adenocarcinoma (A549) cancer cell lines. All the complexes are more active than cisplatin and follow the trend 1 > 2 > 3. Mechanistic studies showed that the trend in cytotoxicity of the Pt(II) complexes is mainly consistent with their ability to accumulate into cancer cells and to increase intracellular basal reactive oxygen species levels, which consequently results in the loss of mitochondrial membrane potential and apoptosis induction. The complex 1 caused to approximately 80-fold higher DNA platination level with respect to cisplatin. The complexes 1-3 can considerably stimulate the production of hydrogen peroxide in a time-dependent manner. Also, the complexes 1-3 induced an increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS) production that was superior to that induced by antimycin. The complex 1 had the most effect on ROS production in comparison with other complexes.

Comparison of four different pain relief methods during hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is the most commonly used method for evaluating the anatomy and patency of the uterine cavity and fallopian tubes, and is an important tool in the evaluation of infertility. The most frequent side effect is the pain associated with the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate four analgesic methods to determine the most useful method for reducing discomfort associated with HSG.

METHODS

In the present prospective study, 75 patients undergoing HSG for evaluation of infertility were randomly assigned to four groups: 550 mg of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (group 1); 550 mg NSAID + paracervical block (group 2); 550 mg NSAID + paracervical analgesic cream (group 3); or 550 mg NSAID + intrauterine analgesic instillation (group 4). A visual analogue scale was used to assess the pain perception at five predefined steps.

RESULTS

Instillation of the liquids used for HSG was found to be the most painful step of HSG, and this step was where the only significant difference among groups was observed. When comparing visual analogue scale scores, group 2 and group 3 reported significantly less pain than the other groups. Group 1 reported significantly higher mean (± SD) scores (7.2 ± 1.6) compared with groups 2 and 3 (4.7 ± 2.5 and 3.8 ± 2.4, respectively) (P<0.001). In addition, group 2 reported significantly less pain than group 4 (4. 7 ± 2.5 versus 6.7 ± 1.8, respectively) (P<0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

For effective pain relief during HSG, in addition to 550 mg NSAID, local application of lidocaine cream to the posterior fornix of the cervix uteri and paracervical lidocaine injection into the cervix uteri appear to be the most effective methods.

Randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of topical lidocaine gel and intrauterine lidocaine infusion for pain relief during saline contrast sonohysterography

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of topical lidocaine gel and intrauterine lidocaine infusion administered prior to saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH) in reducing pain level during the procedure.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. We recruited 120 women scheduled to undergo SCSH and randomized them into one of three groups according to administration of gel and intrauterine infusion immediately prior to the procedure: (1) the 'lidocaine gel' group received 3 mL 2% lidocaine gel applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion, using an infant feeding tube without balloon, of 5 mL normal saline; (2) the 'lidocaine infusion' group received 3 mL gel lubricant applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion of 5 mL 2% lidocaine; (3) the placebo group received 3 mL gel lubricant applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion of 5 mL normal saline. The tube was left in place for the SCSH procedure. The primary outcome measure was the overall pain level (on a scale of 0-100) reported by the women during the SCSH procedure. Women also rated their pain levels at various other time points and an observer assessed visible signs of the women's discomfort during the procedure, producing a distress score.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics, volume of saline solution infused, tenaculum use and duration and difficulty level of the SCSH procedure. The median (range) pain scores during normal saline infusion for the SCSH procedure were 0 (0-65) in the placebo group, 2.5 (0-80) in the lidocaine gel group, and 0 (0-70) in the lidocaine infusion group. The pain scores at other time points, the overall pain score and the distress score were also comparable for the three groups. No significant adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

SCSH performed with an infant feeding tube without balloon is associated with very low pain levels. Topical lidocaine gel application and intrauterine lidocaine infusion do not further reduce pain levels during SCSH.

Intrauterine lidocaine for pain control during laminaria insertion: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine if intrauterine administration of 5 cc of 2% lidocaine in addition to paracervical block reduces pain during laminaria insertion, when compared with paracervical block and saline placebo.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized, double blind placebo-controlled trial. Women presenting for abortion by dilation and evacuation (D&E) at 14-24 weeks gestational age were randomized to receive an intrauterine instillation of either 5 mL of 2% lidocaine or 5 mL of normal saline, in addition to standard paracervical block with 20 cc of 0.25% bupivacaine. Our primary outcome was self-reported pain scores on a 100mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) immediately following laminaria insertion. Secondary outcome was self-reported VAS pain score indicating the maximum level of pain experienced during the 24-48-h interval between laminaria insertion and D&E procedure.

RESULTS

Seventy-two women were enrolled, and data for 67 women were analyzed, only two of whom were more than 21 weeks on gestation. The range of pain scores at both time points was large (1-90 mm at laminaria insertion; 0-100mm in laminaria-D&E interval). Mean pain scores were not different between treatment groups at laminaria insertion, (33 vs. 32, p=.8) or in the laminaria - D&E interval (43 vs. 44, p=.9).

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine administration of 5 cc of 2% lidocaine in addition to paracervical block did not reduce pain with laminaria insertion when compared to paracervical block with saline placebo.

IMPLICATIONS

Intrauterine lidocaine combined with paracervical block does not improve pain control at laminaria insertion when compared with paracervical block and saline placebo. Wide variation in pain scores and persistent pain after laminaria insertion suggests patient would benefit from more effective methods of pain control at laminaria insertion and during the post-laminaria interval.

Safety aspects and side-effects of ExEm-gel and foam for uterine cavity distension and tubal patency testing

A state-of-the-art overview of the safety and side-effects of ExEm-gel for uterine cavity distension and ExEm-foam for tubal patency testing is presented. A literature search was carried out using PubMed, textbooks, pharmaceutical databases and reports of toxicity tests. Information on clinical use in humans and experiments in animal models was collected and grouped according to the following components: glycerol, hydroxyethyl cellulose and purified water; subjects included toxicity test, influence on sperm cells, oocytes, blastocyst development, uterine cavity distension, tubal patency testing, pain and obstetric applications. No unknown side-effects of gel or foam, or unexpected concerns about safety, were reported. More information than expected was available on the absence of effects of the components on various human tissues. Although it is difficult to prove that the search is complete, and it is possible that side-effects remain unreported, the combination of glycerol, hydroxyethyl cellulose and purified water is considered to be safe for intrauterine application and tubal patency testing, indicating an optimal risk-benefit ratio in clinical use. The safest strategy, however, is to restrict clinical examinations with gel and foam to the pre-ovulatory phase of the menstrual cycle.

Hysterosalpingocontrast sonography (HyCoSy): evaluation of the pain perception, side effects and complications

Background

Tubal and uterine cavity diseases commonly compromise female fertility. At the present time, hysteroscopy, laparoscopy with chromopertubation and RX-Hysterosalpingography (RX-HSG) are widely accepted screening procedures enabling the effective assessment of both tubal patency and uterine cavity. Nevertheless, consistent evidence supports the reliability of Hysterosalpingocontrast sonography (HyCoSy) in uterine cavity and tubal patency investigation, as a part of the standard infertility work-up. This prospective study was aimed at evaluating the tolerability of the technique as well as the incidence of related side effects and complications in a large series of infertile patients.

Methods

Pain perception of 632 infertile women was measured by means of an 11-point numeric rating scale. Side effects and late complications were also recorded.

Results

The mean numeric rating scale was 2.15 ± 2.0 SD. Most of the patients (374/632, 59.17%) rated HyCoSy as a non-painful procedure, whereas 24.36% (154/632) women reported mild pelvic pain and 9.96% (63/632) classified the discomfort as “moderate”. Only 6.48% (41/632) of the patient population experienced severe pelvic pain. Fifteen (2.37%) patients required drug administration for pain relief. Twenty-six patients (4.11%) showed mild vaso-vagal reactions that resolved without atropine administration. No severe vaso-vagal reactions or late complications were observed.

Conclusions

HyCoSy is a well-tolerated examination and the associated vagal effects are unusual and generally mild. Consequently, we support its introduction as a first-line procedure for tubal patency and uterine cavity investigation in infertile women.

Sonohysterosalpingography: a suitable choice in infertility workup

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, compliance, and cost effectiveness of sonohysterosalpingography (HyCoSy) compared with hysteroscopy for uterine cavity evaluation and compared with RX-hysterosalpingography (RX-HSG) for tubal patency determination.

METHODS

Three hundred and eight infertile patients underwent HyCoSy, hysteroscopy, and RX-HSG. We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), discomfort level, and cost of all three procedures.

RESULTS

Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were higher for HyCoSy than for hysteroscopy but the differences were not significant. HyCoSy also has the same accuracy as RX-HSG. Pain perception and cost were higher for RX-HSG and hysteroscopy than for HyCoSy.

CONCLUSIONS

HyCoSy can be regarded as a procedure for initial evaluation of the uterine cavity and of tubal patency in infertile patients.

Intrauterine anesthesia for gynecologic procedures: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of intrauterine local anesthesia in reducing pain associated with outpatient gynecologic procedures.

DATA SOURCES

We searched online databases PubMed or MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov and hand-searched reference lists from reviews evaluating pain-control methods for gynecologic office procedures. We identified randomized controlled trials using intrauterine local anesthetic in gynecologic procedures.

METHODS

Titles and abstracts were screened for 1,236 articles. We identified 45 potential articles for inclusion. We excluded 22 of these studies because: 1) they were not randomized controlled trials; 2) they did not describe a quantifiable dose of medication used in the study; 3) they did not investigate an intrauterine anesthetic; 4) they did not study a potentially awake, outpatient procedure; and 5) they did not clearly report results or represented duplicate publication. Twenty-three articles were ultimately included for review.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Two authors independently reviewed full search results and assessed eligibility for inclusion and independently abstracted data from all articles that met criteria for inclusion. Disagreements regarding eligibility or abstraction data were adjudicated by a third independent person. Our primary end point was the reported effect of intrauterine local anesthesia on patient-reported pain scores. As a result of heterogeneity in study methods, outcome measures, and reporting of outcomes, results could not be combined in a meta-analysis. Good evidence supports use of intrauterine anesthesia in endometrial biopsy and curettage, because five good-quality studies reported reduced pain scores, whereas only one good-quality study reported negative results. We found moderate evidence to support intrauterine anesthesia in hysteroscopy, because one good-quality study and two fair or poor quality studies reported reduced pain scores, whereas two good-quality studies had negative results. Good evidence suggests that intrauterine anesthesia is not effective in hysterosalpingography; three good-quality studies reported that pain scores were not reduced, and no good quality studies showed a beneficial effect in that procedure. Evidence was insufficient concerning first-trimester abortion, saline-infusion ultrasonogram, tubal sterilization, and intrauterine device insertion.

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine local anesthesia can reduce pain in several gynecologic procedures including endometrial biopsy, curettage, and hysteroscopy and may be effective in other procedures as well.

Could antispasmodic drug reduce pain during hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy) in infertile patients? A randomized double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of an antispasmodic drug, hyoscine-N-butylbromide, in reducing pain during hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy).

METHODS

Eight hundred and sixteen patients undergoing HyCoSy were randomized to receive 10 mg hyoscine-N-butylbromide (n = 408) or placebo (n = 408) per os, 30 min before the procedure, in a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Immediately after the procedure, the patient was asked to describe any pain experienced in comparison with pain usually suffered during the menstrual cycle, and the operator assigned a pain score between 0 and 4 as follows: 0 (no reaction or discomfort), 1 (slight pain, less than menstrual pain), 2 (moderate pain, exceeding menstrual cramps but no vasovagal reaction), 3 (vasovagal reaction or pain requiring observation in a hospital) and 4 (vasovagal reaction or pain requiring resuscitation). The primary aim was to estimate the difference in pain score, considered as a categorical value, between the active arm of the trial and the control group. The secondary aim was to evaluate if pain is related to tubal patency.

RESULTS

There was no difference in pain score between the hyoscine-N-butylbromide group and the placebo group (P = 0.807). There was a negative correlation between pain and tubal patency, regardless of treatment group (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of 10 mg antispasmodic drug hyoscine-N-butylbromide does not reduce pain in patients undergoing HyCoSy.

Comparison of lidocaine 1% and normal saline in paracervical anesthesia for decreasing of pain in curettage

The objective of this study was to compare the efficiency oflidocaine with that of plain saline for paracervical pain relief during fractional curettage. The double-blind randomized clinical trial was performed on 150 patients presenting from 2004 to 2005 for curettage. The patients were assigned randomly in two groups to receive lidocaine 1% or normal saline. Number of patients at each group was 75 women. The pain intensity was assessed in four stages: (1) after speculum insertion, (2) during cervical dilatation, (3) during curettage and (4) 30 min after curettage completion. The pain intensity was graded as 0 to 100 according to the Likert Scale. The Mean +/- SD of pain intensity after speculum insertion, during dilatation, during curettage and 30 min after curettage in lidocaine group were 11.33 +/- 9.70, 24.93 +/- 15.36, 37.00 +/- 17.35, 6.47 +/- 6.42 and in normal saline group were 11.73 +/- 9.81, 28.20 +/- 13.19, 49.47 +/- 21.55 and 7.33 +/- 6.22, respectively. There was no significant difference between pain intensity after speculum insertion, during dilatation and during 30 min after curettage but there was a significant difference in pain intensity during curettage between lidocaine 1% group and normal saline group (p < 0.05). Normal saline is as effective as lidocaine 1% in low pain in curettage (distention of nerve capsule) but when increase pain in curettage (third time point), lidocaine 1% is more effective than normal saline. Nerve capsule distention is not the only factor for pain control in paracervical block and analgesic agent is still an important factor.