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.

First-trimester surgical abortion practice in Canada in 2012.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate practices among first-trimester surgical abortion facilities and providers in Canada in 2012 and examine the characteristics of the surgical abortion work force. DESIGN: Self-administered paper or electronic survey adapted from a survey previously fielded in the United States. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Facility administrators and physicians. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Descriptive statistics on reported first-trimester surgical abortion practice and provider demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Eighty-three percent of identified facilities (78 of 94) and 178 physicians responded. Of the respondents, 99% of facilities and 96% of physicians provided first-trimester surgical abortions. Responding facilities provided 68,154 first-trimester surgical abortions in 2012. This represented 96% of their reported total (combined medical and surgical) first-trimester abortions. More than half (55%) of responding facilities were community based, while 45% were hospital affiliated. Most physician providers were female (68%) and were family doctors (59%). Preoperatively, 96% of physicians routinely used ultrasound and 89% gave perioperative antibiotics. Almost half (48%) used manual vacuum aspiration, but less than 35% did so beyond 9 weeks after the last menstrual period. At most facilities, most procedures were performed under combined local anesthesia and intravenous sedation (73%); only 7% indicated deep sedation or general anesthesia were used exclusively. Postoperatively, 81% of physicians performed immediate tissue examination and 96% offered postabortion contraception on the same day as the abortion. Other assessed outcomes included medication regimens and cervical preparation, with a high degree of consistency among facilities and physicians. CONCLUSION: First-trimester surgical abortion providers are mostly family physicians and most are female. Practices across Canada were mostly uniform and followed evidence-based guidelines. Uptake of the most recent Canadian practice guidelines may help further standardize patient care and improve routine perioperative antibiotic use and immediate tissue examination.

Pain control in first trimester surgical abortion.

BACKGROUND: First trimester abortions especially cervical dilation and suction aspiration are associated with pain, despite various methods of pain control. OBJECTIVES: Compare different methods of pain control during first trimester surgical abortion. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched multiple electronic databases with the appropriate key words, as well as reference lists of articles, and contacted professionals to seek other trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing methods of pain control in first trimester surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks gestational age using electric or manual suction aspiration. Outcomes included intra- and postoperative pain, side effects, recovery measures and satisfaction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data. Meta-analysis results are expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) or Peto Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included forty studies with 5131 participants. Due to heterogeneity we divided studies into 7 groups:Local anesthesia: Data was insufficient to show a clear benefit of a paracervical block (PCB) compared to no PCB or a PCB with bacteriostatic saline. Pain scores during dilation and aspiration were improved with deep injection (WMD -1.64 95% CI -3.21 to -0.08; WMD 1.00 95% CI 1.09 to 0.91), and with adding a 4% intrauterine lidocaine infusion (WMD -2.0 95% CI -3.29 to -0.71, WMD -2.8 95% CI -3.95 to -1.65 with dilation and aspiration respectively).PCB with premedication: Ibuprofen and naproxen resulted in small reduction of intra- and post-operative pain.Analgesia: Diclofenac-sodium did not reduce pain.Conscious sedation: The addition of conscious intravenous sedation using diazepam and fentanyl to PCB decreased procedural pain.General anesthesia (GA): Conscious sedation increased intraoperative but decreased postoperative pain compared to GA (Peto OR 14.77 95% CI 4.91 to 44.38, and Peto OR 7.47 95% CI 2.2 to 25.36 for dilation and aspiration respectively, and WMD 1.00 95% CI 1.77 to 0.23 postoperatively). Inhalation anesthetics are associated with increased blood loss (p<0.001).GA with premedication: The COX 2 inhibitor etoricoxib, the non-selective COX inhibitors lornoxicam, diclofenac and ketorolac IM, and the opioid nalbuphine were improved postoperative pain.Non-pharmacological intervention: Listening to music decreased procedural pain.No major complication was observed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Conscious sedation, GA and some non-pharmacological interventions decreased procedural and postoperative pain, while being safe and satisfactory to patients. Data on the widely used PCB is inadequate to support its use, and it needs to be further studied to determine any benefit.

Refining paracervical block techniques for pain control in first trimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate two different aspects of the paracervical block (PCB) technique for first trimester surgical abortion, to compare a 3-min wait prior to cervical dilation to no wait and to compare four-site with two-site injection. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted two consecutive randomized, single-blinded noninferiority trials. In the first trial, women <11 weeks gestational age received a 20-mL 1% buffered lidocaine four-site PCB with either a 3-min wait between PCB injection and dilation or no wait. In the second trial, we compared a four-site with a two-site PCB. We evaluated dilation pain [100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS)] as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain at additional time points, anxiety, satisfaction and adverse events. RESULTS: Both trials fully enrolled (total n=332). Results were inconclusive as to whether no wait was noninferior to waiting 3-min prior to cervical dilation for dilation pain [VAS: 63 mm (SD, 24 mm) vs. 56 mm (SD, 32mm)] and as to whether a two-site PCB was noninferior to a four-site block [VAS: 68 mm (SD, 21 mm) vs. 60 mm (SD, 30 mm)]. Noninferiority analysis was inconclusive because the confidence interval of the mean pain score difference between groups included the predefined inferiority margin of 13-mm pain difference. Superiority analysis showed the four-site PCB to be superior to the two-site PCB. CONCLUSION: It remained inconclusive whether a 3-min wait time between PCB and cervical dilation provides noninferior pain control for first trimester surgical abortion. However, a four-site PCB appeared to be superior to a two-site PCB. IMPLICATIONS: It remained inconclusive whether a 3-min wait time between PCB and cervical dilation or using a two-site instead of a four-site PCB provided noninferior pain control for first trimester surgical abortion. This study did not assess whether the combination of the two separate factors provides additive benefit.

Abortion care for adolescent and young women.

BACKGROUND: Unintended pregnancy among adolescents (10-19years) and young women (20-24years) is a global public health problem. Adolescents face challenges in accessing safe abortion care. OBJECTIVE: To determine, via a systematic data review, whether abortion care for adolescent and young women differs clinically from that for older women. METHODS: In a comprehensive data review, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and POPLINE databases were searched from the earliest data entered until November 2012. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing effectiveness, safety, acceptability, and long-term sequelae of abortion care between adolescent/young women and older women were identified. Two reviewers independently extracted data, and the Cochrane guidelines and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used for quality assessment. RESULTS: In total, there were 25 studies including 346 000 women undergoing first- and second-trimester medical abortion, vacuum aspiration, or dilation and evacuation. Effectiveness and overall complications were similar among age groups. However, younger women had an increased risk for cervical laceration and a decreased risk of uterine perforation and mortality. Satisfaction and long-term depression were similar between age groups. Except for less uptake of intrauterine devices among adolescents, age did not affect post-abortion contraception. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from various healthcare systems indicates that abortion is safe and efficacious among adolescent and young women. Clinical services should promote access to safe abortion for adolescents.

Pregnancy outcomes with an IUD in situ: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: While intrauterine devices (IUDs) provide highly effective contraception, pregnancies among IUD users do rarely occur. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the evidence about risks for adverse pregnancy outcomes among women who conceive with an IUD in situ. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, POPLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases from inception through April 2011 for peer-reviewed articles containing evidence related to pregnancy outcomes among women who conceived while using copper (Cu) and levonorgestrel-releasing (LNG) IUDs. RESULTS: Nine articles met our inclusion criteria. Women with retained IUDs were at the greatest risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, including spontaneous abortion, preterm delivery, septic abortion and chorioamnionitis. Cu-IUD removal decreased risks but not to the baseline risk of pregnancies without an IUD. One case series examined the LNG-IUD; when left in situ, 8 in 10 ended in spontaneous abortions. CONCLUSION: Pregnancies complicated by a remaining IUD in situ were at greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Early IUD removal appeared to improve outcomes but did not entirely eliminate risks.

Paracervical block for pain control in first-trimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Despite lack of efficacy data, the majority of first-trimester surgical abortions are performed with a paracervical block. Women may be unnecessarily exposed to a painful injection and potentially noxious medication. Our objective was to estimate the effect of a paracervical block and the effect of gestational age on patient pain perception. METHODS: This was a randomized, single-blind trial of patients undergoing abortion receiving paracervical block or sham stratified by gestational age (early: less than 8 weeks of gestation, n=60; late: 8-10 6/7 weeks of gestation, n=60). Premedicated with ibuprofen and lorazepam, all participants received 2 mL 1% buffered lidocaine injected at the tenaculum site followed by a slow, deep injection of 18 mL at four sites (block) or no injection (sham) with a 3-minute wait. The primary outcome was dilation pain (100-mm visual analog scale). Secondary outcomes included pain at additional time points, satisfaction, need for more analgesics, and adverse events. RESULTS: Full enrollment occurred (n=120). We used intent-to-treat analysis. Demographics did not differ between groups. Paracervical block administration was painful (mean 55 mm compared with sham 30 mm, P<.001) but decreased dilation pain (42 mm compared with 79 mm, P<.001) and aspiration pain (63mm compared with 89 mm, P<.001). These results were consistent for both gestational age strata; however, paracervical block benefit was greater at an earlier gestation. Satisfaction scores with pain control and the procedure were significantly higher in the block group. CONCLUSION: Although paracervical block is painful, it reduces first-trimester abortion pain regardless of gestational age, but the benefit on dilation pain was greater at earlier gestations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01094366. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Hydrocodone-acetaminophen for pain control in first-trimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Although hydrocodone-acetaminophen is commonly used for pain control in first-trimester abortion, the efficacy of oral opioids for decreasing pain has not been established. Our objective was to estimate the effect of hydrocodone-acetaminophen on patient pain perception during first-trimester surgical abortion. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Patients (before 11 weeks of gestation) received standard premedication (ibuprofen and lorazepam) and a paracervical block with the addition of 10 mg hydrocodone and 650 mg acetaminophen or placebo 45-90 minutes before surgical abortion. A sample size of 120 was calculated to provide 80% power to show a 15-mm difference (α=0.05) in the primary outcome of pain with uterine aspiration (100-mm visual analog scale). Secondary outcomes were pain at additional time points, satisfaction, side effects, adverse events, and need for additional pain medications. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographics or baseline pain between groups. There were no differences in pain scores between patients receiving hydrocodone-acetaminophen compared with placebo during uterine aspiration (65.7 mm compared with 63.2 mm, P=.59) or other procedural time points. There were no differences in satisfaction or need for additional pain medications. Patients who received hydrocodone-acetaminophen had more postoperative nausea than those receiving placebo (P=.03) when controlling for baseline nausea. No medication-related adverse events were noted. CONCLUSION: Hydrocodone-acetaminophen does not decrease pain during first-trimester abortion and may increase postoperative nausea. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01330459. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.