RSS-Feed abonnieren
![](/products/assets/desktop/img/oa-logo.png)
DOI: 10.1055/a-2150-0835
Loop Excision for Precancers of the Uterine Cervix: Local or General Anaesthetic?
Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: English | deutsch![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/gebfra/202310/lookinside/thumbnails/10-1055-a-2150-0835_en-1.jpg)
Abstract
Aim
In Germany, treatment of HSIL or AIS of the uterine cervix by loop excision is performed almost exclusively under general anaesthesia (GA). International studies and guidelines show high acceptance of local anaesthesia (LA) due to hermeneutic, medical, and economic factors. We performed an observational comparative study aiming to prove advantages of local anaesthesia within the German health system.
Patients and Methods
In a prospective observational study, patients diagnosed with HSIL or AIS of the uterine cervix were treated at the Institute for Cytology and Dysplasia, Berlin, by loop excision in 2021. We started with a feasibility study: 303 patients diagnosed with HSIL/AIS of the uterine cervix and her colposcopist answered an electronic questionnaire with respect to loop excision under LA.
Since we found a high acceptance for LA in patients and colposcopists, we initiated a comparative study LA vs. GA: 322 patients underwent loop excision and selected their mode of anaesthesia: n = 206 LA vs. n = 116 GA. 114 patients of the feasibility study had to undergo loop excision and became part of the comparative study (n = 79 for the LA group, n = 35 for the GA group). All patients received a standardised questionnaire to document their pain score within 24 h after treatment on a visual analogue scale, i.e. VAS, between 0 and 100. 178 patients of the LA group and 80 patients of the GA group completed and returned the questionnaire and form the cohort for our comparison of LA vs. GA. With 191 of these 258 patients, i.e. 74%, a telephone survey was performed to ask for patient satisfaction and the rates of recurrence after a mean interval of 1 year post surgery. We postulate that there will be no clinically relevant significant difference in satisfaction and postoperative pain between patients in the LA group and the GA group.
Results
In the feasibility study, 90% (272 of 303) of patients diagnosed with HSIL or AIS were considered eligible for LA by their colposcopists. 75% (227 of 303) of patients were open to loop excision under LA.
In the comparative study, 63 of 206 women of the LA group were interviewed preoperatively: 89% would accept a pain score above 20 during the procedure, 33% a pain score above 50 and 11% of max. 20. Postoperatively, the median VAS pain score for loop excision under local anaesthesia was 13.1 in 178 patients, and pain during injection of local anaesthesia was 20.9 (p < 0.001). The VAS pain score 20 minutes post surgery did not differ significantly between 178 patients after local anaesthesia versus 80 patients after general anaesthesia (p = 0.09). The surgeons estimated the patient’s pain significantly less than the patients themselves with an underestimate of −14.63 points on the VAS (p < 0.001).
Within 7 days following loop excision under LA, 95.5% of 178 patients would choose local anaesthesia as their preferred method for a potential repeat loop excision, 8.8% of which would like additional painkillers, and 4.5% would choose general anaesthesia.
In a telephone follow-up survey of 133 women from the LA group after a mean of 12 months post surgery, 97% were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the treatment carried out. For patient satisfaction and postoperative pain, no clinically relevant significant difference was seen between the LA and the GA group.
The rate of secondary bleeding (6.7% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.72), recurrence of HSIL/AIS (3.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.62), and the distribution of the histopathological R status (R0 89.5% vs. 81.1%, p = 0.73; R1 5.3% vs.12.2%, p = 0.57, Rx 4.1% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.65) showed no significant difference when comparing the LA group versus the GA group.
Conclusion
Following loop excision under local anaesthesia, more than 95% of patients would choose this method again for repeat surgery. One year post surgery, 97% of the patients were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the treatment under local anaesthesia. Offering local anaesthesia for loop excision to patients should be mandatory and included in current guidelines.
Publikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 26. Mai 2023
Angenommen nach Revision: 05. August 2023
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
14. September 2023
© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References/Literatur
- 1 Hilal Z, Tempfer CB, Rezniczek GA. Treatment of Cervical Dysplasia by Clinicians Who Perform Colposcopy in German-speaking Countries – a Questionnaire-based Study. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2019; 79: 189-197 DOI: 10.1055/a-0828-7831. (PMID: 30792549)
- 2 Hecken JM, Rezniczek GA, Tempfer CB. Innovative Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in Cervical Dysplasia: A Systematic Review of Controlled Trials. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14: 2670 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112670. (PMID: 35681649)
- 3 Rezniczek GA, Hecken JM, Rehman S. et al. Syringe or mask? Loop electrosurgical excision procedure under local or general anesthesia: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223: 888.e1-888.e9 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.06.041. (PMID: 32585223)
- 4 Schmitter M, List T, Wirz S. [The assessment of pain intensity using one-dimensional scales]. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2013; 107: 279-284 DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2013.05.008. (PMID: 23916265)
- 5 Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 2005; 14: 798-804 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01121.x. (PMID: 16000093)
- 6 Harper DM, Walstatter BS, Lofton BJ. Anesthetic blocks for loop electrosurgical excision procedure. J Fam Pract 1994; 39: 249-256 (PMID: 8077904)
- 7 Dhar KK, Foden-Shroff J, Ghoshal S. et al. Local anaesthesia for large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone: has prilocaine/felypressin less side effects than lignocaine/adrenaline. J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 18: 373-374
- 8 Hardwick JC, Kennedy JH, Deeny M. A prospective study of pain following loop excision of the transformation zone under local anaesthesia. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 24: 304-305 DOI: 10.1080/01443610410001660922. (PMID: 15203634)
- 9 Borbolla Foster A, Symonds I. A comparative study of efficacy and outcomes of large loop excision of the transformation zone procedure performed under general anaesthesia versus local anaesthesia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 52: 128-132 DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2012.01420.x. (PMID: 22369204)
- 10 Ward B. Re: Borbolla Foster A & Symonds I. A comparative study of the efficacy and outcomes of large loop excision of the transformation zone procedure performed under general versus local anaesthesia. ANZJOG 2012; 52: 128–132. [letter]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 52: 407-408 DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2012.01465.x. (PMID: 22861665)
- 11 Babu S, Redmond A, Lacey M. et al. A retrospective review of the type of anaesthesia used for LLETZ: proposal for a categorisation audit tool. Ir J Med Sci 2017; 186: 239-241 DOI: 10.1007/s11845-016-1416-8. (PMID: 26886019)
- 12 Mercuzot A, Chevreau J, Sevestre H. et al. Impact of anaesthesia mode on evaluation of LEEP specimen dimensions. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2017; 46: 339-342 DOI: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2016.12.006. (PMID: 28643661)
- 13 Ooi S, Eskaroos MA, Pather S. et al. Patient expectations and experiences with loop electrosurgical excision procedure in inpatient and outpatient settings. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2022; 62: 720-724
- 14 Tzur Y, Berkovitz-Shperling R, Laskov I. et al. Recurrent Dysplasia After a Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure: Local Versus General Anesthesia. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2022; 26: 315-318 DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000692. (PMID: 35997172)
- 15 Woo YL, Badley C, Jackson E. et al. Long-term cytological and histological outcomes in women managed with loop excision treatment under local anaesthetic for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cytopathology 2011; 22: 334-339
- 16 Güngördük K, Türkmen HE, Gülseren V. et al. Influence of General and Local Anesthesia on Postoperative Pain After a Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2023; 27: 217-222 DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000744. (PMID: 37194724)
- 17 Cattin J, Rufenacht E, Roesch M. et al. [Evaluation of satisfaction after in-office conization under local anesthesia]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016; 45: 948-954 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2016.03.006. (PMID: 27114063)
- 18 Yap SJ, Nathan E, Farrell L. LLETZ make it simple: Anxiety, pain and treatment outcomes with outpatient large loop excision of the transformation zone under local anaesthesia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2020; 60: 438-443 DOI: 10.1111/ajo.13121. (PMID: 32002985)
- 19 Kongsawatvorakul C, Charakorn C, Paiwattananupant K. et al. Limited Impact of Music Therapy on Patient Anxiety with the Large Loop Excision of Transformation Zone Procedure – a Randomized Controlled Trial. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2016; 17: 2853-2856
- 20 Swancutt DR, Luesley DM, Eastaugh JL. et al. Anaesthetic choice in the colposcopy clinic: a retrospective analysis of routinely collected data. BJOG 2008; 115: 646-652 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01664.x. (PMID: 18333947)
- 21 Cruickshank ME, Anthony GB, Fitzmaurice A. et al. A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect of self-administered analgesia on women’s experience of outpatient treatment at colposcopy. BJOG 2005; 112: 1652-1658 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00782.x. (PMID: 16305570)
- 22 Williams LK, Weber JM, Pieper C. et al. Lidocaine-Prilocaine Cream Compared With Injected Lidocaine for Vulvar Biopsy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol 2020; 135: 311-318
- 23 Zilbert A. Topical anesthesia for minor gynecological procedures: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2002; 57: 171-178 DOI: 10.1097/00006254-200203000-00022. (PMID: 11889416)
- 24 Limwatanapan N, Chalapati W, Songthamwat S. et al. Lidocaine Spray Versus Paracervical Block During Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure: A Randomized Trial. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2018; 22: 38-41