Effect of topical bupivacaine on postoperative pain after laparoscopic tubal sterilization with Filshie clips

Reducing postoperative pain after tubal ligation with rings or clips: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of using local anesthesia during interval laparoscopic tubal ligation to control postoperative pain.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases and found additional articles from bibliographies of relevant studies.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

We included only randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials reporting postoperative pain after interval laparoscopic tubal ligation under general anesthesia (n=20). The trials compared the application of topical or injectable local anesthetic with placebo and used a visual analog scale (VAS) (scores 0-100) or the Modified McGill Pain Intensity Scale (subsequently converted to a VAS) to assess pain.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Pain scores were evaluated at the following times after extubation: 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, 8 hours, and 24 hours. The meta-analysis was based on random-effects methods for pooled data using RevMan. Postoperative pain decreased with the use of local anesthetic compared with placebo as follows (mean VAS decrease in millimeters, 95% confidence interval): 30 minutes 18.6 (11.7-25.5); 1 hour 16.6 (9.3-24.0); 2 hours 17.4 (9.6-25.2); 4 hours 12.5 (5.1-19.9); 8 hours 11.9 (6.7-17.1); and 24 hours 3.9 (-1.4 to 9.2). There was moderate heterogeneity in the data across studies (I statistic ranging from 55% to 75%). The effect size was similar for the following subgroups: pain scores reported as means or medians and use of McGill compared with VAS pain scales. A stratified analysis of trials including ring tubal ligation compared with clip tubal ligation showed the use of local anesthetic decreased pain substantially for both. No eligible studies assessed tubal ligation with cautery.

CONCLUSION

Use of local anesthetic during laparoscopic tubal ligation substantially reduces postoperative pain up to 8 hours after surgery.

Systematic review and metaanalysis of intraperitoneal instillation of local anesthetics for reduction of pain after gynecologic laparoscopy

We reviewed the effectiveness of intraperitoneal instillation of local anesthetic on pain after gynecologic laparoscopic surgery. Sources included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations databases, and abstracts, reference lists, and randomized controlled trial (RCT) registries. The 7 included RCTs compared pain scores after administration of intraperitoneal analgesics or placebo/control during gynecologic laparoscopic surgery with benign indications. Outcome measures were pain scores (per visual analog scale) at 1 to 2, 4 to 6, and 24 hours postoperatively. Pain scores were significantly lower in the groups receiving local anesthesia at 1 to 2 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD], -1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.55 to -1.08]) and 4 to 6 hours postoperatively (WMD, -2.00; 95% CI, -3.64 to -0.35), but were similar at 24 hours (WMD, -1.43; 95% CI, -1.15 to 0.96). Local analgesia instilled intraperitoneally significantly decreased pain during a 6-hour interval after gynecologic laparoscopy.

Does bupivacaine in laparoscopic ports reduce postsurgery pain in tubal ligation by electrocoagulation? A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tubal ligation (TL) is the most popular method of permanent contraception. In order to reduce postoperative pain, different analgesic techniques have been proposed. The objective of this study was to compare the level of postoperative pain in patients submitted to TL with electrocoagulation, under general anesthesia, using bupivacaine infiltration vs. placebo in trocar ports.

STUDY DESIGN

Consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic TL were randomized by sequenced coded envelopes to receive bupivacaine 0.5% (n=29) or placebo (n=24). Pain was blindly assessed at 15 min, 30 min, 120 min and 14 h postoperatively, by verbal analogue scale (VAS). Standard pain medications (morphine, dipyrone and sodium diclofenac) were prescribed for the subjects and compared between groups.

RESULTS

No difference in pain assessment was found between bupivacaine and placebo groups at all times [median (25-75 quartiles)] (all p>.05): 15 min: 3 (1-6.3) vs. 4 (0-7); 30 min: 1.5 (0-4.3) vs. 2 (0-5); 2 h: 0 (0-0.5) vs. 0 (0-1); 14 h: 1 (0-4) vs. 0 (0-4); and for use of analgesics: dipyrone (g): 1 (0-1) vs. 1 (0-1); morphine (mg): 3 (0-3) vs. 3 (0-3.5); sodium diclofenac (mg): 0 (0-50) vs. 0 (0-50).

CONCLUSION

The use of local injection of bupivacaine 0.5% in the trocar ports was not superior to placebo to reduce pain after laparoscopic TL with electrocoagulation under general anesthesia.

Management of chronic pelvic pain additional to tubal sterilization

OBJECTIVE

A case series is presented to illustrate the dilemma in management of women with Chronic Pelvic Pain (CPP) additional to a tubal sterilization.

METHODS

Between January 1999 and June 2007, five women consulted the Department of Gynecology for CPP additional to tubal sterilization with Filshie Clips (FCs). A biopsychosocial approach of the complaint was offered and laparoscopic removal of the clips was performed in all cases. The effectiveness of this management was assessed by a personal interview and a retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

Two of the five patients refused an exploration of psychosocial factors possibly contributing to or maintaining the pain. During laparoscopic removal of the Filshie Clips no additional pathology was noted. At follow-up four women declared to have benefited from the removal procedure.

CONCLUSION

If women present with CPP additional to sterilization with FCs in the absence of obvious pathology, gynecologists have to pay attention to the possibility of underlying psychosocial factors to this complaint. However, this attention can be in conflict with the woman's conviction that only removal of the clips will alleviate her pain. In that case, laparoscopic removal might be a component of the management.

Anesthesia for outpatient gynecologic surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anesthesia care for patients undergoing ambulatory gynecologic surgery has improved incrementally over the past few years. Emphasis has evolved beyond the safe provision of care, because this has largely been achieved. Comfort, speed, and efficiency have taken on new importance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many changes relate to improvements in non-narcotic analgesic techniques and use of various supralaryngeal airways, such as the ProSeal LMA. Also, use of depth of anesthesia monitors and administration of potent short-acting beta-blockers and narcotics to control hemodynamic variables are examples of new anesthesia developments well applied to ambulatory gynecologic cases. Finally, anesthesia care is changing in some instances because surgical techniques are advancing, such as hysteroscopy, and can now be done in an office with little or no anesthesia.

SUMMARY

Local anesthetic use in gynecologic laparoscopy appears to improve postoperative pain control modestly, especially when given into the peritoneal cavity. Supralaryngeal airways, such as ProSeal LMA, appear to provide effective ventilation in laparoscopy, although their ability to protect against aspiration is unclear. The speed and comfort of emergence, recovery, and discharge may be improved by consciousness monitoring during general anesthesia and by drugs intended to modulate hemodynamics.