medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2021, Number 04

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2021; 89 (04)

Advantages of paracervical block and endouterine manual aspiration for the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding due to endometrial hypertrophy and incomplete abortion in the first quarter

Rodríguez-Ruíz AF, MoralesÁlvarez JJ, Díaz-González SB

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 279-285
PDF size: 188.98 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the advantages and benefits of paracervical block vs conventional anesthesia for manual vacuum aspiration in patients with incomplete abortion and endometrial hyperplasia.
Materials and Methods: An analytical, comparative and retrospective study was carried out in patients with a diagnosis of incomplete abortion in the first trimester or endometrial hyperplasia who underwent manual vacuum aspiration under paracervical block or regional anesthesia, treated at the tochosurgery service in the Obstetric- Gynecology Department.
Results: We analyzed 144 files of patients with a diagnosis of incomplete first trimester abortion and endometrial hypertrophy operated by paracervical block (53.47%) and epidural block (46.53%). The indication for manual vacuum aspiration was: endometrial hyperplasia in 40.97% and for incomplete abortion 59.03%. Pain was mild in 57.14%, moderate in 38.96% and severe in 3.90%.
Conclusion: In patients in whom manual vacuum aspiration was performed, the effectiveness of paracervical block was less than with conventional anesthesia in the control of postoperative pain. In patients with incomplete spontaneous abortion no statistical difference was found in postoperative pain between analgesic techniques. Therefore, paracervical block may be an alternative in the care of these patients, especially when the resources and infrastructure necessary to administer an epidural block are not available.


REFERENCES

  1. Haddad LB, Nour NM. Unsafe abortion: unnecessary maternal mortality. Reviews in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009; 2 (2): 122. PMID 19609407.

  2. Guía de Práctica Clínica Diagnóstico y Tratamiento del Aborto Espontáneo, Manejo Inicial de Aborto Recurrente, México; Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2009

  3. Tratamiento médico del aborto. Ginebra: Organización Mundial de la Salud, 2019. https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/ publications/medical- management-abortion/es/

  4. Emons G, Beckmann MW, Schmidt D, Mallmann P. New WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasias. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2015; 75 (2): 135-6. 10.1055/s- 0034-1396256.

  5. Sirimai, Korakot, et al. Comparison of endometrial pathology between tissues obtained from manual vaccum aspiration and sharp metal curettage in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Med Assoc Thailand 2016;99 (2): 111-18.https://europepmc.org/article/med/27249889.

  6. Rodríguez RR, Mujica Silva CM, . Bloqueo paracervical vs anestesia general intravenosa en la aspiración y legrado endouterino. Trinidad. 2006. Gaceta Médica Espirituana, 2012; 10 (1): 9. http://revgmespirituana.sld.cu/index.php/ gme/article/view/1226.

  7. Allen RH, Kumar D, Fitzmaurice G, Lifford KL, et al. Pain management of first-trimester surgical abortion: effects of selection of local anesthesia with and without lorazepam or intravenous sedation. Contraception 2006; 74 (5): 407-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception. 2006.06.002.

  8. Catterall W, Mackie K. Anestésicos locales. En: Hardman JG, Linbird LE, Goodman Gilman A. Las bases farmacológicas de la terapéutica. 10a ed. México: Mc Graw-Hill-Interamericana, 2013; 375-91. https://accessmedicina.mhmedical. com/book.aspx?bookID=2457.

  9. Cansino C, Edelman A, Burke A, Jamshidi R, et al. Paracervical block with combined ketorolac and lidocaine in firsttrimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2009; 114 (6): 1220-26. https:// doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c1a55b.

  10. Carusi AD, Steinauer J, Chakrabarti A. Retained products of conception. Up to date, diciembre 19:2019. https://www. uptodate.com/contents/retained-products-of- conceptio n?topicRef=5442&source=see_link#H22.

  11. IPAS. Pasos para realizar el procedimeinto de aspiración manual endouterina utilizando el aspirador Ipas AMEU Plus y las cánulas Ipas EasyGrip: Folleto instructivo. IPAS, 2019. 4a ed. http://www.ipas.org/sources/.

  12. Açmaz, Gökhan, Bayraktar E, Aksoy H, Baser M, et al. Effect of paracetamol, dexketoprofen trometamol, lidocaine spray, pethidine & diclofenac sodium application for pain relief during fractional curettage: A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Med Research 2015; 142 (4): 399. http://doi. org/10.4103/0971-5916.169197.

  13. Yazici FG, Arsian M, Birbicer H, Kanik A, et al. Comparison of the intrauterine topical anaesthesia and paracervical block on pain in patients undergoing endometrial biopsy. Pain Clinic 2003; 15 (3): 339-43. https://doi. org/10.1163/156856903767650899.

  14. Lazenby GB, Fogelson NS, Aeby T. Impact of paracervical block on postabortion pain in patients undergoing abortion under general anesthesia. Contraception 2009; 80 (6): 578- 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.05.125.

  15. Tangsiriwatthana T, Saangkomkamhang US, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Paracervical local anaesthesia for cervical dilatation and uterine intervention. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013, no 9. https://doi. org/10.1002/14651858.CD005056.pub3.

  16. Junttila EK, Karjalainen PK, Ohtonen PP, Raudaskoski TH, Ranta PO. A comparison of paracervical block with singleshot spinal for labour analgesia in multiparous women: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Obstet Anest 2009; 18 (1): 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijoa.2008.01.020.

  17. Mankowski JL, Kingston J, Moran T, Charles N, et al. Paracervical compared with intracervical lidocaine for suction curettage: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2009; 113 (5): 1052-57. https://doi.org/10.1097/ AOG.0b013e31819ec97e.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com