A randomized comparison of intravenous sedation using a dosing algorithm compared to standard care during first-trimester surgical abortion

Local anaesthesia for pain control in first trimester surgical abortion

BACKGROUND

Abortions prior to 14 weeks are among the most common outpatient surgical procedures performed on people capable of becoming pregnant. Various methods have been used to control pain; however, many people still experience pain with the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of local anaesthesia given for pain control during surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (Ovid EBM Reviews), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, POPLINE, and Google Scholar to December 2022 for randomized controlled trials of pain control in surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation using suction aspiration. We searched the reference lists of related reviews and articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected effectiveness and comparative effectiveness randomized controlled trials that studied local anaesthesia with common local anaesthetics and administration routes given for pain control in surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation using uterine aspiration. Outcomes included intraoperative pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We computed mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous variables reporting a mean. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1992 participants met the inclusion criteria. Due to heterogeneity of interventions, we could not pool more than two studies for any outcome. We used 13 mm improvement on a visual/verbal analogue scale to indicate a clinically meaningful difference in pain with surgical abortion (pain with dilation, aspiration, or during procedure). Based on type of pain control, we divided studies into three groups. Paracervical block (PCB) effectiveness trials A 20 mL 1% lidocaine PCB reduced pain with dilation (MD -37.00, 95% CI -45.64 to -28.36), and aspiration (MD -26.00, 95% CI -33.48 to -18.52) compared to a sham PCB (1 RCT, 120 participants; high-certainty evidence). A PCB with 14 mL of 1% chloroprocaine resulted in a slight reduction in pain with aspiration compared to a PCB with normal saline injected at two or four sites (MD -1.50, 95% CI -2.45 to -0.55; 1 RCT, 79 participants; high-certainty evidence). PCB comparative effectiveness trials An ultracaine PCB probably results in little to no clinically meaningful difference in pain during procedure compared to topical cervical lidocaine spray (median 1 point higher, interquartile range (IQR) 0 to 3; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 48 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A 1000 mg dose of intravenous paracetamol probably does not decrease pain as much as ultracaine PCB during procedure (median 2 points higher, IQR 1 to 3; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 46 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Various local anaesthetics in PCB comparative effectiveness trials A 10 mL buffered 2% lidocaine PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to a plain lidocaine PCB (MD -0.80, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.71; 1 RCT, 167 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A buffered lidocaine PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to plain lidocaine PCB (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.06; 2 RCTs, 291 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Non-PCB local anaesthesia or PCB technique effectiveness trials PCB: waiting versus no waiting Waiting three to five minutes between 1% lidocaine PCB injection and dilation probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to not waiting (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.17; 2 RCTs, 357 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Topical cervical analgesia Topical 10 mL 2% lignocaine gel probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to KY Jelly (MD -0.87, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.14; 1 RCT, 131 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants who also received a PCB, 20 mg topical cervical lidocaine spray probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain during the procedure compared to two pumps of normal saline spray (median -1 point, IQR -2 to -1; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 55 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Intravenous paracetamol 1000 mg compared to two pumps of cervical lidocaine spray probably does not results in a clinically meaningful difference in pain procedure (median 1 point, IQR -2 to 2; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 48 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-PCB local anaesthesia or PCB technique comparative effectiveness trials Depth of PCB The evidence suggests that a 3-cm deep PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to a 1.5-cm deep PCB (MD -1.00, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.91; 2 RCTs, 229 participants; low-certainty evidence). PCB: four sites versus two sites A two-site (4-8 o'clock) 20 mL 1% lidocaine PCB does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to a four-site (2-4-8-10 o'clock) PCB (MD 8.60, 95% CI 0.69 to 16.51; 1 RCT, 163 participants; high-certainty evidence). Overall, participants reported moderately high satisfaction with pain control and studies reported few adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from this updated review indicates that a 20 mL 1% plain lidocaine PCB decreases pain during an abortion procedure. Evidence supports forgoing buffering lidocaine and a wait time between PCB injection and cervical dilation. A 1.5-cm deep injection as opposed to a 3-cm deep injection is sufficient. A two-site PCB injection as opposed to a four-site injection has similar effectiveness. Topical cervical anaesthesia (10 mL 2% lignocaine gel or 20 mg topical cervical lidocaine spray) as compared to placebo did not decrease pain based on moderate-certainty evidence, but then when compared to PCB, pain control was similar. Due to this inconsistency in evidence regarding the effectiveness of topical anaesthesia, its routine use is presently not supported. This review did not include studies of pain management with conscious sedation but, based on the results of our prior Cochrane review and the 2022 WHO guidelines, we recommend that the option of combination of pain management using conscious sedation plus PCB and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be offered where conscious sedation is available as it further decreases pain.

A comparison of misoprostol with and without methylergometrine and oxytocin in outpatient medical abortion: a phase III randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The complications associated with miscarriages have surfaced as a major concern in maintaining women's physical and mental health. The present study evaluated the efficacy of three medication regimes for the complete expulsion of retained intrauterine tissues in patients who underwent a miscarriage.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 90 patients participated with their gestational age below 12 weeks, each having undergone a recent miscarriage. After being screened for underlying diseases and coagulative blood disorders, they were randomly allocated into three groups. For the first group, labeled as the control group, misoprostol was administered alone. In contrast, the combination of misoprostol plus methylergometrine and misoprostol plus oxytocin was prescribed for the second and third groups, respectively. Further, the data obtained were analyzed by descriptive and inferential statistics using Stata software version 14.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants and gestational age were 29.76 ± 5.53 years and 8.23 ± 2.29 weeks, respectively. There was no significant difference between the three treatment groups regarding the amount of bleeding after the abortion(P = 0.627). Regarding pain severity, the group that received Misoprostol plus Methylergometrine had less pain intensity than the other two groups(p = 0.004). The mean rate of RPOC expulsion was in the Misoprostol plus Oxytocin (9.68 ± 10.36) group, Misoprostol plus Methylergometrine (11.73 ± 12.86), and Misoprostol groups (19.07 ± 14.31)(p = 0.013). The success rate in outpatient medical abortion in the misoprostol plus oxytocin and misoprostol plus methylergonovine group was 93.33%, but in patients treated by misoprostol alone was 83.33%.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of the drugs in the two drug groups combined with oxytocin and methylergometrine is higher than the misoprostol group alone. An outpatient approach was deemed more satisfactory against surgical maneuvers and hospitalizations by patients since family support influenced their pain coping mechanism.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered in the Iranian registry of clinical trials on 04/10/2019. ( https://fa.irct.ir/trial/34519 ; registration number: IRCT20150407021653N19).

Society of Family Planning clinical recommendations: Pain control in surgical abortion part 2 - Moderate sedation, deep sedation, and general anesthesia

Analgesic options for surgical abortion (also called procedural abortion) beyond local anesthesia and minimal sedation include moderate sedation, deep sedation and general anesthesia. These clinical recommendations review the effectiveness of various moderate sedation, deep sedation, and general anesthesia regimens for pain control during abortion; medication regimens used to induce analgesia and anesthesia; patient factors affecting anesthesia safety; preoperative and intraoperative protocols to reduce anesthesia risks; personnel qualifications for administration; recommended patient monitoring protocols; and general risks of anesthesia in the context of abortion care. The scope of these recommendations is based on limited available evidence and considerably relies on existing professional society guidelines and recommendations developed by content experts and reviewers. Further research to compare the efficacy and safety of different regimens is needed.

Gabapentin as an adjunct to paracervical block for perioperative pain management for first-trimester uterine aspiration: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain management approaches during uterine aspiration vary, which include local anesthetic, oral analgesics, moderate sedation, deep sedation, or a combination of approaches. For local anesthetic approaches specifically, we continue to have suboptimal pain control. Gabapentin as an adjunct to pain management has proven to be beneficial in gynecologic surgery. We sought to evaluate the impact of gabapentin on perioperative pain during surgical management of first-trimester abortion or early pregnancy loss with uterine aspiration under local anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that adding gabapentin to local anesthesia will reduce perioperative and postoperative pain associated with uterine aspiration. Secondary outcomes included tolerability of gabapentin and postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and anxiety.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin 600 mg given 1 to 2 hours preoperatively among subjects receiving a first-trimester uterine aspiration under paracervical block in an outpatient ambulatory surgery center. There were 111 subjects randomized. The primary outcome was pain at time of uterine aspiration as measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes included pain at other perioperative time points. To assess changes in pain measures, an intention to treat mixed effects model was fit with treatment groups (gabapentin vs control) as a between-subjects factor and time point as a within-subjects factor plus their interaction term. Because of a non-normal distribution of pain scores, the area under the curve was calculated for secondary outcomes with comparison of groups utilizing Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Among the 111 randomized, most subjects were Black or African American (69.4%), mean age was 26 years (±5.5), and mean gestational age was 61.3 days (standard deviation, 14.10). Mean pain scores at time of uterine aspiration were 66.77 (gabapentin) vs 71.06 (placebo), with a mean difference of -3.38 (P=.51). There were no significant changes in pain score preoperatively or intraoperatively. Subjects who received gabapentin had significantly lower levels of pain at 10 minutes after surgery (mean difference [standard error (SE)]=-13.0 [-5.0]; P=.01) and 30 minutes after surgery (mean difference [SE]=-10.8 [-5.1]; P=.03) compared with subjects who received placebo. Median nausea scores and incidence of emesis pre- and postoperatively did not differ between groups. Similarly, anxiety scores did not differ between groups, before or after the procedure. At 10 and 30 minutes after the procedure, most participants reported no side effects or mild side effects, and this did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative gabapentin did not reduce pain during uterine aspiration. However, it did reduce postoperative pain, which may prove to be a desired attribute of its use, particularly in cases where postoperative pain may be a greater challenge.