Pain relief in office gynaecology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Gaity Ahmad, S. Attarbashi, Shatha Attarbashi, Helena O'Flynn, Helena O’Flynn, Andrew J S Watson, Andrew Watson
European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2011 · vol. 155(1) , pp. 3–13 · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.11.018 · PMID:21255900 · W1975691123
Systematic review / meta-analysis OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 6 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-08-08 ⓘ

This systematic review and meta-analysis found local anesthetics provided pain relief during and after hysteroscopy and hysterosalpingo-contrastsonography, reducing procedure completion failure due to pain.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Hysteroscopy, hysterosalpingography (HSG), sonohysterography and endometrial ablation are increasingly performed in an outpatient setting. The primary reason for failure to complete these procedures is pain. The objective of this review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of different types of pharmacological intervention for pain relief in office gynaecological procedures. A systematic search of medical databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central register of controlled trials, PsychInfo and CINHAL was conducted in 2009. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of local anaesthetics, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics and intravenous sedation for pain relief during and after hysteroscopy, HSG, sonohysterography and endometrial ablation were reviewed. Secondary outcomes included adverse effects and failure to complete procedures. Where RCTs were not identified, the best available evidence was sought. Each study was assessed against inclusion criterion. Results for each study were expressed as a standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals and combined for meta-analysis with Revman 5 software. Meta-analysis revealed beneficial effect of the use of local anaesthetics during and within 30 min after hysteroscopy; SMD -0.45 (95% CI -0.73, -0.17) and SMD -0.51 (95% CI -0.81, -0.21) respectively. No beneficial effect was noted during HSG. One RCT found evidence of benefit for pain relief during hysterosalpingo-contrastsonography; SMD -1.04 [95% CI -1.44, -0.63]. There was no significant difference in failure to complete hysteroscopy due to cervical stenosis between the intervention and control groups (OR 1.31 (95% CI 0.66, 2.59)), but the incidence of failure to complete the procedure due to pain was significantly less in the intervention group (OR 0.29 (0.12, 0.69)). There is evidence of benefit for the use of local anaesthetics for outpatient hysteroscopy and hysterosalpingo-contrastsonography. Local anaesthetics may be considered when performing hysteroscopy in postmenopausal women to reduce the failure rate.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

MeSH descriptors

Ambulatory Care Facilities Analgesics Anesthetics, Local Diagnostic Techniques, Obstetrical and Gynecological Gynecologic Surgical Procedures Hypnotics and Sedatives Postoperative Pain Analgesics Analgesics Anesthetics, Local Anesthetics, Local Diagnostic Techniques, Obstetrical and Gynecological Female Gynecologic Surgical Procedures Humans Hypnotics and Sedatives Hypnotics and Sedatives Postoperative Pain Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Treatment Refusal

Citation neighborhood (2-hop)

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]

References (52)

Cited by (3)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:08:28.697392+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK