Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Turk J Obstet Gynecol ; 19(4): 327-332, 2022 Dec 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36511648

RESUMEN

To evaluate the efficacy of lidocaine local analgesia on maternal pain reduction during amniocentesis. Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases were screened from inception and updated in July 2022. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated for the risk of bias via the Cochrane tool. The primary outcome was pain perception using the 10 cm visual analog scale, and was summarized as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the mode of administration. Meta-analysis was done via Review Manager software. We included five RCTs totaling 1004 women (lidocaine arm n=502 patients and control arm n=502 patients). Overall, there was no significant difference between both arms [MD=-0.21, 95% CI (-0.48, 0.07), p=0.80]. The pooled analysis showed homogeneity (p=0.13, I2=43%). Subgroup analysis according to the mode of administration showed that pain perception did not significantly differ between both arms when lidocaine was employed as injection [n=3 RCTs, MD=-0.26, 95% CI (-0.76, 0.23), p=0.29] or non-injection [n=2 RCTs, MD=-0.18, 95% CI (-0.55, 0.18), p=0.33]. The pooled analyses showed heterogeneity (p=0.05, I2=66%) and homogeneity (p=0.27, I2=19%), respectively. There was no noteworthy change concerning maternal pain perception between the lidocaine and control arms. Most women reported just minimal discomfort during amniocentesis. Counseling should educate patients that the pain they might experience during amniocentesis is comparable to venous blood sampling.

2.
Hum Fertil (Camb) ; 25(3): 422-429, 2022 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33140669

RESUMEN

This paper reports a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of hyoscine-N-butylbromide (HBB) administration in hysterosalpingography (HSG). Four electronic databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared HBB versus placebo or no intervention in infertile women undergoing HSG. Pain during and after HSG and different adverse events including nausea, vomiting, and dizziness were evaluated. Three RCTs with 335 patients were included. The analysis showed HBB was significantly effective in reducing pain during and after HSG (MD = -0.76 mm, 95% CI [-1.35, -0.17], p = 0.01) and (MD = -0.81 mm, 95% CI [-1.07, -0.56], p < 0.001), respectively. There were no significant differences in adverse events between HBB and control groups. The methodological evidence quality was high as evaluated by GRADEpro. In conclusion, this review provides good evidence that prior administration of HBB is effective in reducing induced pain during and after HSG with tolerable side effects.


Asunto(s)
Histerosalpingografía , Infertilidad Femenina , Bromuro de Butilescopolamonio/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Hidrocarburos Bromados , Histerosalpingografía/efectos adversos , Infertilidad Femenina/tratamiento farmacológico , Infertilidad Femenina/etiología , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/etiología , Percepción del Dolor , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Escopolamina
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA