Comparison between local anaesthesia with remifentanil and total intravenous anaesthesia for operative hysteroscopic procedures in day surgery

Effect of Remimazolam Supplementation on Propofol Requirements During Hysteroscopy: A Double-Blind, Dose-Response Study

BACKGROUND

Propofol is commonly used for procedural sedation but may increase side effects in a dose-dependent manner. Remimazolam, an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine, has been approved for procedural sedation but may delay awakening. This study tested the hypothesis that remimazolam as a supplement reduces effect-site propofol concentration (Ceprop) required to suppress response to cervical dilation in patients undergoing hysteroscopy.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty patients who were scheduled for hysteroscopy were randomized to receive 0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, or 0.2 mg·kg-1 intravenous remimazolam, followed by a bolus of sufentanil 0.15 μg⋅kg-1, and a target-controlled propofol infusion. The initial target Ceprop was 3.5 μg·mL-1 and was increased or decreased in subsequent patients by steps of 0.5 μg·mL-1 according to whether there was loss of response to cervical dilation in the previous patient. We used up-down sequential analysis to determine values of Ceprop that suppressed response to cervical dilation in 50% of patients (EC50).

RESULTS

The EC50 of propofol for suppressing response to cervical dilation was lower in patients given 0.1 mg·kg-1 (2.08 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.88-2.28] μg·mL-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (1.83 [1.56-2.10] μg·mL-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (1.43 [1.27-1.58] μg·mL-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (3.67 [3.49-3.86] μg·mL-1) or 0.05 mg⋅kg-1 (3.47 [3.28-3.67] μg·mL-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Remimazolam at doses of 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 mg·kg-1 decreased EC50 of propofol by 43.3% (95% CI, 41.3%-45.5%), 50.3% (48.0%-52.8%), and 61.2% (58.7%-63.8%), respectively, from baseline (remimazolam 0 mg⋅kg-1). Propofol consumption was lower in patients given 0.1 mg⋅kg-1 (4.15 [3.51-5.44] mg·kg-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (3.54 [3.16-4.46] mg·kg-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (2.74 [1.73-4.01] mg·kg-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (6.09 [4.99-7.35] mg·kg-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Time to anesthesia emergence did not differ significantly among the 5 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For women undergoing hysteroscopic procedures, remimazolam at doses from 0.1 to 0.2 mg·kg-1 reduced the EC50 of propofol inhibiting response to cervical dilation and the total propofol requirement. Whether the combination could improve perioperative outcomes deserves further investigation.

Comparison of the effects of spinal anesthesia, paracervical block and general anesthesia on pain, nausea and vomiting, and analgesic requirements in diagnostic hysteroscopy: A non-randomized clinical trial

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of spinal anesthesia (SPA), paracervical block (PB), and general anesthesia (GA), on pain, the frequency of nausea and vomiting and analgesic requirements in diagnostic hysteroscopy.

Methods

This single-center, non-randomized, parallel-group, clinical trial was conducted on 66 diagnostic hysteroscopy candidates who were selected by convenience sampling at Fatemieh Hospital, in Hamadan, Iran, in 2021.

Results

The mean pain score during recovery and the need for analgesic injections was found to be significantly higher in the GA group compared to that in the SPA group (pain: 3.77 ± 2.25 vs. 0.10 ± 0.30, P < 0.001), (analgesic: 50 vs. 0%, P < 0.001) and PB group (pain: 3.77 ± 2.25 vs. 0.90 ± 1.37, P < 0.001), (analgesic 50 vs. 10%, P < 0.001), respectively. However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the mean pain score between SPA and PB groups (0.10 ± 0.30 vs. 0.90 ± 1.3, P = 0.661). In addition, there were no significant differences between groups on nausea/vomiting after operation (P = 0.382). In adjusted regression analysis (adjusting for age, weight, gravid, abortion, and cause of hysteroscopy), the odds ratio (OR) of pain score during recovery was increased in PB (OR: 4.471, 95% CI: 1.527-6.156, P = 0.018) and GA (OR: 8.406, 95% CI: 2.421-9.195, P = 0.001) groups compared with the SPA group. However, in adjusting based on times of surgery duration, anesthesia duration, recovery and return of motor function, the ORs of pain score between groups was not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Despite reduced pain during recovery in patients receiving SPA, duration of anesthesia, recovery period, and return of motor function were significantly prolonged compared to those receiving PB or GA. It seems that PB with less recovery time and faster return of motor function than SPA and also mild pain during recovery compared to GA can be a good option for hysteroscopy.

Clinical trial registration

http://www.irct.ir, identifier IRCT20120915010841N26.

Procedural analgesic interventions in China: a national survey of 2198 hospitals

Background

Humane treatment requires the provision of appropriate sedation and analgesia during medical diagnosis and treatment. However, limited information is available about the status of procedural analgesic interventions in Chinese hospitals. Therefore, a nationwide survey was established to identify challenges and propose potential improvement strategies.

Methods

Forty-three members of the Pain Group of Chinese Society of Anesthesiology established and reviewed the questionnaire, which included (1) general information on the hospitals, (2) the sedation/analgesia rate in gastrointestinal endoscopy, labor, flexible bronchoscopy, hysteroscopy in China, (3) staff assignments, (4) drug use for procedural analgesic interventions, and (5) difficulties in procedural analgesic interventions. The data were obtained using an online questionnaire sent to the chief anesthesiologists of Chinese hospitals above Grade II or members of the Pain Group of Chinese Society of Anesthesiology.

Results

Valid and complete questionnaires were received from 2198 (44.0%) hospitals, of which 64.5% were Grade III. The overall sedation/analgesia rates were as follows: gastroscopy (50.6%), colonoscopy (53.7%), ERCP (65.9%), induced abortion (67.5%), labor (42.3%), hysteroscopy (67.0%) and fiber bronchoscopy (52.6%). Compared with Grade II hospitals, Grade III hospitals had a higher proportion of procedural analgesic interventions services except for induced abortion. On average (median [IQR]), each anesthesiologist performed 5.7 [2.3—11.4] cases per day, with 7.3 [3.2—13.6] performed in Grade III hospitals and 3.4 [1.8—6.8] performed in Grade II hospitals (z = -7.065, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Chinese anesthesiologists have made great efforts to achieve procedural analgesic interventions, as evidenced by the increased rate. The uneven health care provided by hospitals at different levels and in different regions and the lack of anesthesiologists are the main barriers to optimal procedural analgesic interventions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01783-6.

Four year evaluation of therapeutic hysteroscopy under procedural sedation in an outpatient clinic

OBJECTIVE

Due to the evolution of hysteroscopic instruments, therapeutic hysteroscopic procedures are increasingly performed in an outpatient, office-based setting. The most important limiting factor of performing these hysteroscopic treatments is patient discomfort. Procedural Sedation Analgesia (PSA) decreases patient discomfort and anxiety. The main goal of this study is to determine safety, feasibility and patient satisfaction of therapeutic hysteroscopy performed under procedural sedation in an outpatient clinic. Our second objective was to compare 9 mm scopes with smaller diameter scopes.

STUDY DESIGN

All consecutive patients suitable for procedural sedation and scheduled for a therapeutic hysteroscopy in the outpatient clinic were prospectively included from February 2014 to November 2018 in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. A variety of therapeutic hysteroscopies procedures was performed including myomectomy, removal of retained products of conception and endometrial ablation. Therapeutic hysteroscopes with 3.8 mm, 5 mm and 9 mm diameter were used. In all selected women procedure time, admission time, pain scores, anaesthesiologic and procedural complications were assessed. All women received a questionnaire on patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

In total 455 patients underwent a therapeutic hysteroscopy. Median procedure time was 11 min (2-63 min) and median admission time was 130 min (30-480 min). Median pain score according to the visual analog scale (VAS) before, during and after procedure were respectively 0 (0-10), 0 (0-4) and 0 (0-9). Anaesthesiologic complication rate was 4.4 %, all minor. Procedural complications consisted of infection postoperatively (0.4 %), excessive blood loss during procedure (0.6 %) and perforation (0.4 %). Procedure was incomplete in 3.3 % of all procedures. Patient satisfaction was high, as 96 % of the women were satisfied. No differences were found in pain scores, VAS 0 versus 1 after the procedure, between 3.8 or 5 mm and 9 mm scopes.

CONCLUSION

It is safe and feasible to perform a therapeutic hysteroscopy under procedural sedation in an outpatient setting, with low pain scores and a high degree of patient satisfaction, also when large diameter instruments are used.

Dexmedetomidine-remifentanil vs propofol-remifentanil for monitored anesthesia care during hysteroscopy: Randomized, single-blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although dexmedetomidine has been used as either the anesthetic agent for light sedation or as an adjunct to other sedatives, no study has investigated the usefulness of dexmedetomidine as the main sedative agent for invasive and painful procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during monitored anesthesia care (MAC) for hysteroscopy.

METHODS

Female patients undergoing hysteroscopy were randomly assigned to either the dexmedetomidine (group D) or the propofol group (group P). The study drug (0.6 ml/kg; dexmedetomidine 2 μg/ml or propofol 4 mg/ml) was loaded for 10 minutes followed by 0.1 to 0.5 ml/kg/hour to maintain a bispectral index of 60 to 80 during the procedure. In both groups, remifentanil was infused using a target-controlled-infusion system with a target concentration of 2 ng/ml and titrated during the procedure. The incidence rates of intraoperative respiratory depression in both groups were compared. Postoperative pain and patients satisfaction were also compared.

RESULTS

A total of 69 female patients were included in this study. Dexmedetomidine significantly decrease the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol (15/34 [44.1%] vs 5/35 [14.3%], P = .006, group P and D, respectively). Postoperative pain and patients satisfaction score did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The combination of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil can reduce the incidence of respiratory depression without increasing hemodynamic complications compared with propofol-remifentanil for MAC during hysteroscopy.

Supraglottic jet oxygenation and ventilation for obese patients under intravenous anesthesia during hysteroscopy: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Background

Supraglottic jet oxygenation and ventilation (SJOV) can effectively maintain adequate oxygenation in patients with respiratory depression, even in apnea patients. However, there have been no randomized controlled clinical trials of SJOV in obese patients. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of SJOV using WEI Nasal Jet tube (WNJ) for obese patients who underwent hysteroscopy under intravenous anesthesia without endotracheal intubation.

Methods

A single-center, prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted. The obese patients receiving hysteroscopy under intravenous anesthesia were randomly divided into three groups: Control group maintaining oxygen supply via face masks (100% oxygen, flow at 6 L/min), the WNJ Oxygen Group with WNJ (100% oxygen, flow: 6 L/min) and the WNJ SJOV Group with SJOV via WNJ [Jet ventilator working parameters:100% oxygen supply, driving pressure (DP) 0.1 MPa, respiratory rate; (RR): 15 bpm, I/E; ratio 1:1.5]. SpO₂, P_ETCO₂, BP, HR, ECG and BIS were continuously monitored during anesthesia. Two-Diameter Method was deployed to measure cross sectional area of the gastric antrum (CSA-GA) by ultrasound before and after SJOV in the WNJ SJOV Group. Episodes of SpO₂ less than 95%, P_ETCO₂ less than 10 mmHg, depth of WNJ placement and measured CSA-GA before and after jet ventilation in the WNJ SJOV Group during the operation were recorded. The other adverse events were collected as well.

Results

A total of 102 patients were enrolled, with two patients excluded. Demographic characteristics were similar among the three groups. Compared with the Control Group, the incidence of P_ETCO₂ < 10 mmHg, SpO₂ < 95% in the WNJ SJOV group dropped from 36 to 9% (P = 0.009),from 33 to 6% (P = 0.006) respectively,and the application rate of jaw-lift decreased from 33 to 3% (P = 0.001), and the total percentage of adverse events decreased from 36 to 12% (P = 0.004). Compared with the WNJ Oxygen Group, the use of SJOV via WNJ significantly decreased episodes of SpO₂ < 95% from 27 to 6% (P = 0.023), P_ETCO₂ < 10 mmHg from 33 to 9% (P = 0.017), respectively. Depth of WNJ placement was about 12.34 cm in WNJ SJOV Group. There was no significantly difference of CSA-GA before and after SJOV in the WNJ SJOV Group (P = 0.234). There were no obvious cases of nasal bleeding in all the three groups.

Conclusions

SJOV can effectively and safely maintain adequate oxygenation in obese patients under intravenous anesthesia without intubation during hysteroscopy. This efficient oxygenation may be mainly attributed to supplies of high concentration oxygenation to the supraglottic area, and the high pressure jet pulse providing effective ventilation. Although the nasal airway tube supporting collapsed airway by WNJ also plays a role. SJOV doesn’t seem to increase gastric distension and the risk of aspiration. SJOV can improve the safety of surgery by reducing the incidence of the intraoperative involuntary limbs swing, hip twist and cough.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Registration number, ChiCTR1800017028, registered on July 9, 2018.

Efficacy of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia vs epidural anesthesia alone in total hysterectomy: Impact on serum motilin and gastrin

AIM

To compare the efficacy of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia vs epidural anesthesia in total hysterectomy and the impact on the serum motilin and gastrin.

METHODS

Ninety-two patients who underwent total hysterectomy at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital from September 2015 to January 2016 were selected and randomly divided into two groups to receiver either combined spinal and epidural anesthesia or epidural anesthesia alone, with 46 cases in each groups. The two groups of patients were compared for intraoperative parameters, serum motilin and gastrin, patients' heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and awakening time, and intraoperative complications.

RESULTS

Time to successful induction of anesthesia was significantly shorter and use of anesthetics was significantly less in the combination group than in the epidural anesthesia alone group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in operative time between the two groups (P > 0.05). Before anesthesia, serum motilin showed no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05); after anesthesia, the combination group had a more obvious decrease (P < 0.05). Serum motilin exhibited a transient increase intraoperatively, but declined at day 1 postoperatively in both groups; the decrease was more significant in the combination group (P < 0.05). Serum gastrin showed no obvious change throughout the process in both groups, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at all time points (P > 0.05). After anesthesia, the combination group was superior to the epidural anesthesia alone group with regard to heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and awaking time, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of complications (6.52%) was significantly lower in the combination group than in the epidural anesthesia alone group (19.57%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for total hysterectomy is safer and more effective and has fewer complications than epidural anesthesia alone. However, serum motilin and gastrin levels are unstable in both groups, and reducing perioperative surgical stress will have a positive impact on serum motilin and gastrin levels.

Hysteroscopic polypectomy: a comparison between 22 Fr and 26 Fr resectoscopes under paracervical block anesthesia, a randomized controlled study

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare 22 Fr unipolar resectoscope with the traditional 26 Fr unipolar resectoscope in endometrial polypectomy performed under paracervical block anesthesia. Methods: The trial took place in Gynecologic Unit, Department of Surgery, Tor Vergata University Hospital, Rome. Inclusion criteria were: diagnosis of endometrial polyps <3 cm at office hysteroscopy; agreement of patients to perform surgery under paracervical block anesthesia but not in office setting. Patients with ASA physical status classes III or more and with contraindication to operative hysteroscopy were excluded. Before the procedure, the recruited patients were randomly assigned to two groups, 35 to the 22 Fr unipolar resectoscope group (group A) and 35 to the 26 Fr unipolar resectoscope group (group B). Primary endpoint was the time spent for cervical dilatation and resection. Secondary endpoints were pain during and after surgery, efficacy of paracervical block, use of analgesic drugs during and after the procedure, patients' satisfaction, correlation between pain and menopause or parity. Statistical analysis was performed by the SPSS software, and the tests used were Pearson Chi-Square, One-way ANOVA and Mann-Whitney test. A p value <.05 was considered significant. Results: The mean time for cervical dilatation was two minutes in group A (26 Fr) and five minutes in group B (22 Fr, p = .001). Operative mean time was four minutes in group A and seven minutes in group B (p = .001). Pain during dilatation was analogous (VAS = 6, p = .054), while during the procedure it was higher in group B (VAS = 1 vs VAS = 2, p = .003). Sufentanil was administered during resection in 19 patients of group A and in 22 patients of group B (p = .754). General anesthesia was never necessary. Postoperative pain was higher in group B (p = .01). Nine patients of group B needed analgesics, as opposed to no patient of group A (p = .002). Conclusions: The 22 Fr unipolar resectoscope appears advantageous compared to the 26 Fr resectoscope in the resection of endometrial polyps <3 cm, in terms of cervical dilatation and operative time, pain and need of postoperative analgesics. Paracervical block is useful and safe in compliant patients at high risk for general anesthesia.

Local Anesthesia Combined With Sedation Compared With General Anesthesia for Ambulatory Operative Hysteroscopy: A Randomized Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare two anesthetic techniques for postoperative pain after ambulatory operative hysteroscopy.

DESIGN

A randomized trial.

METHODS

Women (N = 153) scheduled for ambulatory operative hysteroscopy were assigned to receive either paracervical local anesthesia combined with sedation (group LA + S; n = 76) or general anesthesia (group GA; n = 77). Primary outcome was the worst pain intensity score in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) rated by the patients on a numerical rating scale.

FINDING

Data from 144 patients were available for analysis (LA + S: n = 69; GA: n = 75). There were no significant differences in worst pain intensity between groups in the PACU (P = .13) or after discharge from PACU (P = .40). In group LA + S, fewer patients received treatment with intravenous fentanyl intraoperatively (P < .01) and time until discharge from PACU was shorter (P < .01). More patients in group LA + S experienced vomiting after discharge (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Local anesthesia with sedation can be recommended as a first choice anesthetic technique for operative ambulatory hysteroscopy.

Hysteroscopy: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians

The objective of this study was to provide guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CNGOF), based on the best evidence available, concerning hysteroscopy. Vaginoscopy should be the standard technique for diagnostic hysteroscopy (Grade A) using a miniature (≤3.5mm sheath) (Grade A) rigid hysteroscope (Grade C), using normal saline solution distension medium (Grade C), without any anaesthesia (conscious sedation should not be routinely used), without cervical preparation (Grade B), without vaginal disinfection and without antibiotic prophylaxy (Grade B). Misoprostol (Grade A), vaginal oestrogens (Grade C), or GnRH agonist routine administration is not recommended before operative hysteroscopy. Before performing hysteroscopy, it is important to purge the air out of the system (Grade A). The uterine cavity distention pressure should be maintained below the mean arterial pressure and below 120mm Hg. The maximum fluid deficit of 2000ml is suggested when using normal saline solution and 1000ml is suggested when using hypotonic solution. When uterine perforation is recognized during operative hysteroscopy using monopolar or bipolar loop, the procedure should be stopped and a laparoscopy should be performed in order to eliminate a bowel injury. Diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy is allowed when an endometrial cancer is suspected (Grade B). Implementation of this guideline should decrease the prevalence of complications related to hysteroscopy.

[Prevention of the complications related to hysteroscopy: guidelines for clinical practice]

OBJECTIVE

To provide clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) from the French college of obstetrics and gynecology (CNGOF), based on the best evidence available, concerning the adverse events related to hysteroscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of literature using following Keywords: hysteroscopy; vaginoscopy; infection; perforation; intrauterine adhesions

RESULTS

Vaginoscopy should be the standard technique for outpatient hysteroscopy (grade A) using a miniature (≤ 3.5mm sheath) (grade A) rigid hysteroscope (grade C), using normal saline solution distension medium (grade C), without any anesthesia (conscious sedation should not be routinely used), without cervical preparation (grade B), without vaginal disinfection and without antibiotic prophylaxy (grade B). Misoprostol (grade A), vaginal estrogens (grade C), or GnRH agonist routine administration is not recommended before operative hysteroscopy. Before performing hysteroscopy, it is important to purge the air out of the system (grade A). The uterine cavity distention pressure should be maintained below the mean arterial pressure and below 120 mmHg. The maximum fluid deficit of 2000 mL is suggested when using normal saline solution and 1000 mL is suggested when using hypotonic solution. When uterine perforation is recognized during operative hysteroscopy using monopolar or bipolar loop, the procedure should be stopped and a laparoscopy should be performed in order to eliminate a bowel injury. Diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy is allowed when an endometrial cancer is suspected (grade B).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of this guideline should decrease the prevalence of complications related to office and operative hysteroscopy.