Conscious sedation for office hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the role of conscious sedation on pain control in office hysteroscopy. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched from inception to the 30th October 2020 in order to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials investigating women undergoing office hysteroscopic procedures, allocated to either conscious sedation or a suitable comparator, where the outcome was pain. Data regarding adverse events, feasibility and satisfaction/acceptability were also collected. The Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess study quality. Standard mean differences (SMD) or Odds Ratios (OR), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous (e.g. mean pain) and dichotomous (e.g. side-effects) outcomes, respectively. Results: The literature search returned 339 results, of which seven studies were included for systematic review, with five studies having data suitable for meta-analysis. Intravenous conscious sedation, when compared with local anesthesia, reduced pain during (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.01), but not after (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.07) office hysteroscopy. No significant difference in side-effects were noted (OR 15.58, 95% CI 0.08 to 2891.91). Intravenous conscious sedation, when compared to an oral analgesic and antispasmodic, was associated with increased pain, both during (SMD 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.49) and after (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.93) hysteroscopy and had significantly more side-effects (OR 134.33, 95% CI 16.14 to 1118.17). Inhalational conscious sedation (70% N2O/30% O2), when compared to oral analgesia and anxiolysis, showed the greatest reduction in pain during hysteroscopy (SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.52), however side-effects were not reported. Whilst patients and hysteroscopists were more satisfied with deeper levels of sedation, resulting side-effects, such as delirium, increased the level of post-procedural attention required, leading to a significantly lower level of satisfaction amongst nursing staff. Conclusion: The routine use of conscious sedation in contemporary hysteroscopic practice should be avoided in the absence of any clear reduction in pain and a higher risk of side-effects.Citation
De Silva PM, Carnegy A, Graham C, Smith PP, Clark TJ. Conscious sedation for office hysteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Nov;266:89-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.09.001. Epub 2021 Sep 3Type
ArticleOther
Additional Links
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/european-journal-of-obstetrics-and-gynecology-and-reproductive-biologyPMID
34600190Publisher
Elsevierae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.09.001