RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Loop electrosurgical excision procedure may be performed under local anesthesia or general anesthesia, and practice patterns differ worldwide. No randomized head-to-head comparison has been published to confirm or refute either practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare loop electrosurgical excision procedure under local anesthesia vs general anesthesia regarding patient satisfaction and procedure-related outcomes such as rates of involved margins, complications, pain, and blood loss. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive women referred to our colposcopy unit were recruited. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure was performed under local anesthesia with 4 intracervical injections of bupivacaine hydrochloride 0.5% or under general anesthesia with fentanyl, propofol, and a laryngeal mask with sevoflurane maintenance. The primary endpoint was patient satisfaction assessed on the day of surgery and 14 days thereafter using a Likert scale (score 0-100) and a questionnaire. Secondary endpoints included rates of involved margins, procedure-related complications, pain, blood loss, and surgeon preference. Results were compared using nonparametric and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Between July 2018 and February 2020, we randomized 208 women, 108 in the local anesthesia arm and 100 in the general anesthesia arm. In the intention-to-treat analysis, patient satisfaction did not differ between the study groups directly after surgery (Likert scale 100 [90-100] vs 100 [90-100]; P=.077) and 14 days thereafter (Likert scale 100 [80-100] vs 100 [90-100]; P=.079). In the per-protocol analysis, women in the local anesthesia arm had significantly smaller cone volumes (1.11 cm3 [0.70-1.83] vs 1.58 cm3 [1.08-2.69], respectively; P<.001), less intraoperative blood loss (Δhemoglobin, 0.2 g/dL [-0.1 to 0.4] vs 0.5 g/dL [0.2-0.9]; P<.001), and higher satisfaction after 14 days (100 [90-100] vs 100 [80-100]; P=.026), whereas surgeon preference favored general anesthesia (90 [79-100] vs 100 [90-100], respectively; P=.001). All other secondary outcomes did not differ between groups (resection margin status R1, 6.6% vs 2.1% [P=.26]; cone fragmentation, 12.1% vs 6.3% [P=.27]; procedure duration, 151.5 seconds [120-219.5] vs 180 seconds [117-241.5] [P=.34]; time to complete hemostasis, 60 seconds [34-97] vs 70 seconds [48.25-122.25] [P=.08]; complication rate, 3.3% vs 1.1% [P=.59]). In a multivariate analysis, parity (P=.03), type of transformation zone (P=.03), and cone volume (P=.02) and not study group assignment, age, body mass index, and degree of dysplasia independently influenced the primary endpoint. CONCLUSION: Loop electrosurgical excision procedure under local anesthesia is equally well tolerated and offers patient-reported and procedure-related benefits over general anesthesia, supporting the preferred practice in some institutions and refuting the preferred practice in others.
Assuntos
Anestesia Geral/métodos , Anestesia Local/métodos , Colposcopia/métodos , Eletrocirurgia/métodos , Satisfação do Paciente , Displasia do Colo do Útero/cirurgia , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/cirurgia , Adenocarcinoma in Situ/patologia , Adenocarcinoma in Situ/cirurgia , Adulto , Anestésicos Inalatórios/uso terapêutico , Anestésicos Intravenosos/uso terapêutico , Anestésicos Locais/uso terapêutico , Ansiedade , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Bupivacaína/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patologia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirurgia , Conização/métodos , Feminino , Fentanila/uso terapêutico , Ginecologia , Humanos , Máscaras Laríngeas , Margens de Excisão , Dor Pós-Operatória/fisiopatologia , Dor Processual , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória , Propofol/uso terapêutico , Sevoflurano/uso terapêutico , Lesões Intraepiteliais Escamosas Cervicais/patologia , Lesões Intraepiteliais Escamosas Cervicais/cirurgia , Cirurgiões , Displasia do Colo do Útero/patologia , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/patologiaRESUMO
Human papillomavirus (HPV) has been directly related to acuminate warts and cervical cancer, the second most common neoplasia among women. Given the lack of treatment against the virus itself, many medications have been utilised, mainly aiming in modifying the host's immunological response. We present the case of a 54 years old postmenopausal patient with a history of vaginal cuff wart and HPV persistence that we managed in our clinic for 6 months with a mix of curcumin, aloe vera, amla and other natural ingredients. As the patient was found to be intolerant to imiquimod (one of the most common conservative methods of treatment) we attempted the use of curcumin, which was applied to the area of the wart three times per week for 6 months. Both clinical and colposcopical improvement was noted in regular clinic visits with regression of the lesion. The outcome of this case encourages our view that curcumin should be considered as a significant treatment modality against HPV infection and acuminate warts.