Uterine or paracervical lidocaine application for pain control during intrauterine contraceptive device insertion: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

References

• Finer LB, Zolna MR. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008–2011. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:843–852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoo SH, Guzzo KB, Hayford SR. Understanding the complexity of ambivalence toward pregnancy: does it predict inconsistent use of contraception? Biodemography Soc Biol. 2014;60:49–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohr PA, Lyus R, Prager S. Use of intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2017;95:529–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG. Long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. ACOG practice bulletin 186. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:1173–1175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier RJ, Zerden ML. Intrauterine anesthesia for gynecologic procedures: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:669–677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Mansour D, Fiala C, et al. Management of pain associated with the insertion of intrauterine contraceptives. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19:419–427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pergialiotis V, Vlachos DG, Protopappas A, et al. Analgesic options for placement of an intrauterine contraceptive: a meta-analysis. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2014;19:149–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez LM, Bernholc A, Zeng Y, et al. Interventions for pain with intrauterine device insertion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;29:CD007373.
   Google Scholar
• Zapata LB, Jatlaoui TC, Marchbanks PA, et al. Medications to ease intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review. Contraception. 2016;94:739–759.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. PRISMA group: preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:1006–1012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, et al. European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC). Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011;41:1073–1093.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng JM, Corstiaan A, Hoeks SE, et al. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2102–2108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [cited 2017 Nov 23]. Available from: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins JP. Commentary: heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37:1158–1160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbas AM, Abdellah MS, Khalaf M, et al. Effect of cervical lidocaine–prilocaine cream on pain perception during copper T380A intrauterine device insertion among parous women: a randomized double-blind controlled trial. Contraception. 2017;95:251–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aksoy H, Aksoy Ü, Ozyurt S, et al. Lidocaine 10% spray to the cervix reduces pain during intrauterine device insertion: a double-blind randomised controlled trial. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2016;42:83–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alizadeh-Charandabi SM, Seidi S, Kazemi F. Effect of lidocaine gel on pain from copper IUD insertion: a randomized double-blind controlled trial. Indian J Med Sci. 2010;64:349–355.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Allen RH, Raker C, Goyal V. Higher dose cervical 2% lidocaine gel for IUD insertion: a randomized controlled trial. Contraception. 2013;88:730–736.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cırık DA, Taşkın EA, Alper Tuğlu A, et al. Paracervical block with 1% lidocaine for pain control during intrauterine device insertion: a prospective, single-blinded, controlled study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2:263–267.
   Google Scholar
• Elkhouly NI, Maher MA. Different analgesics prior to intrauterine device insertion: is there any evidence of efficacy? Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017;22:222–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karasu Y, Cömert DK, Karadağ B, et al. Lidocaine for pain control during intrauterine device insertion. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;43:1061.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire K, Davis A, Rosario Tejeda L, et al. Intracervical lidocaine gel for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial. Contraception. 2012;86:214–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mody SK, Kiley J, Rademaker A, et al. Pain control for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized trial of 1% lidocaine paracervical block. Contraception. 2012;86:704–709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavakolian S, Doulabi MA, Baghban AA, et al. Lidocaine–prilocaine cream as analgesia for IUD insertion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, triple blinded study. Glob J Health Sci. 2015;7:399–404.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tornblom-Paulander S, Tingåker BK, Werner A, et al. Novel topical formulation of lidocaine provides significant pain relief for intrauterine device insertion: pharmacokinetic evaluation and randomized placebo-controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:422–427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Covino BG, Wildsmith JAW, Clinical pharmacology of local anesthetic agents. In: Cousins MJ, Bridenbaugh PO, editors. Neural blockade in clinical anesthesia and management of pain. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1998. p. 97–128.
   Google Scholar
• Hacivelioglu S, Gencer M, Cakir Gungor A, et al. Can the addition of a paracervical block to systemic or local analgesics improve the pain perceived by the patient during hysterosalpingography? J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;34:48–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Borestein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, et al. Introduction to meta-analysis. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; 2009. Chapter 20, p. 187–203.
   Google Scholar
• Gordh T. Lidocaine: the origin of a modern local anesthetic (1949). Anesthesiology. 2010;113:1433–1437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taege SK, Adams W, Mueller ER, et al. Anesthetic cream use during office pessary removal and replacement: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:190–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnau B, Jovell E, Romero M, et al. Lidocaine–prilocaine cream as analgesia for hysterosalpingography: a randomized, double blinded, controlled study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;182:216–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keskin AE, Onaran Y, Duvan IC, et al. Topical anesthetic (lidocaine–prilocaine) cream application before speculum examination in postmenopausal women. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012;19:350–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazloomdoost D, Pauls RN, Hennen EN, et al. Liposomal bupivacaine decreases pain following retropubic sling placement: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:598.e1–598.e11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar