Remifentanil patient controlled analgesia versus epidural analgesia in labour. A multicentre randomized controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 109349.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pain relief during labour is a topic of major interest in the Netherlands. Epidural analgesia is considered to be the most effective method of pain relief and recommended as first choice. However its uptake by pregnant women is limited compared to other western countries, partly as a result of non-availability due to logistic problems. Remifentanil, a synthetic opioid, is very suitable for patient controlled analgesia. Recent studies show that epidural analgesia is superior to remifentanil patient controlled analgesia in terms of pain intensity score; however there was no difference in satisfaction with pain relief between both treatments. METHODS/DESIGN: The proposed study is a multicentre randomized controlled study that assesses the cost-effectiveness of remifentanil patient controlled analgesia compared to epidural analgesia. We hypothesize that remifentanil patient controlled analgesia is as effective in improving pain appreciation scores as epidural analgesia, with lower costs and easier achievement of 24 hours availability of pain relief for women in labour and efficient pain relief for those with a contraindication for epidural analgesia.Eligible women will be informed about the study and randomized before active labour has started. Women will be randomly allocated to a strategy based on epidural analgesia or on remifentanil patient controlled analgesia when they request pain relief during labour. Primary outcome is the pain appreciation score, i.e. satisfaction with pain relief.Secondary outcome parameters are costs, patient satisfaction, pain scores (pain-intensity), mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal side effects.The economic analysis will be performed from a short-term healthcare perspective. For both strategies the cost of perinatal care for mother and child, starting at the onset of labour and ending ten days after delivery, will be registered and compared. DISCUSSION: This study, considering cost effectiveness of remifentanil as first choice analgesia versus epidural analgesia, could strongly improve the care for 180.000 women, giving birth in the Netherlands yearly by giving them access to pain relief during labour, 24 hours a day. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register NTR2551, http://www.trialregister.nl

An economic analysis of patient controlled remifentanil and epidural analgesia as pain relief in labour (RAVEL trial) : A randomised controlled trial.

Data Availability: The original full data set included possible identifying information (birthdates and patient initials). A edited dataset without these variables is uploaded with this submission. For access to the full and original data set including birthdates and initials Liv Freeman or Johanna Middeldorp can be contacted. Access to the original case report form can also be requested. Funding: Financial support for this trial was provided by ZonMW (Dutch Organization for Health Care Research and Development), the Hague, the Netherlands, project number 80-82310-97-11039. www.zonmw.nl. The grant applicant was JM, the funding was transfered to the Leiden University Medical Center. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Peer reviewe

Hysteroscopic morcellation vs. curettage for removal of retained products of conception : a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Objective: To study the comparison between hysteroscopic morcellation (HM) of retained products of conception (RPOC) with ultra-sound (US)-guided electric vacuum aspiration in terms of intrauterine adhesion (IUA) formation, efficacy, and complications.Design: A randomized controlled, nonblinded trial.Setting: Three teaching hospitals and one university hospital from April 2015 to June 2022. Patients: A total of 133 women with RPOC on US, ranging from 1-4 cm, were randomized to receive either HM or electric vacuum aspiration.Intervention: Hysteroscopic morcellation was performed with the TruClear System (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). Electric vac-uum aspiration was performed using an 8-or 10-mm flexible plastic Karman cannula under US guidance. Women allocated to vacuum aspiration underwent the procedure as soon as possible.Main Outcome Measures: In the HM group, an office diagnostic hysteroscopy was planned a minimum of 6 weeks after the end of pregnancy, followed by retained product of conception removal at least 8 weeks after the end of the pregnancy. Postoperatively, an office second-look hysteroscopy was scheduled to assess the primary outcome of IUAs.Results: Postoperative IUAs were seen in 14.3% (9/63) of patients in the HM group and 20.6% (13/64) of patients in the vacuum aspi-ration group (-6% [-19.1% to 7.1%]). Significantly more RPOC were removed completely by HM compared with vacuum aspiration (95.2% vs. 82.5% (-14% [-24.9% to -3.1%]), and additional operative hysteroscopy was less frequently necessary in the HM group (12.5%) compared with the vacuum aspiration group (31.3%) (-20.1% [-34.3% to -6%]). The median operating time was shorter for vacuum aspiration compared with HM (5.80 minutes vs. 7.15 minutes). No differences were observed between HM and vacuum aspi-ration for the occurrence of intraoperative or postoperative complications (5.5% vs. 5.0% and 2.7% vs. 1.3%, respectively).Conclusion: In our randomized controlled trial, no significant differences were found in the occurrence of IUAs and complications. However, the RPOC were more often completely removed by HM than vacuum aspiration, and the HM group required fewer additional hysteroscopic treatments

Operative hysteroscopy versus ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration for removal of retained products of conception : a prospective cohort study

Objectives: To compare intrauterine adhesion (IUA) formation after hysteroscopic removal (HR) of retained products of conception (RPOC) with IUA formation after ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) and externally validate the outcomes of an RCT. Study design: This prospective cohort study was conducted from April 2015 until June 2022 in 2 Dutch teaching hospitals and one Belgian university hospital. Women opting for EVA underwent the procedure as soon as possible. In the HR group, the therapeutic hysteroscopy was performed at least eight weeks after the end of pregnancy. Postoperatively, an office second-look hysteroscopy was offered to all patients. Women were included if they had been diagnosed with RPOC ranging from 1 to 4 cm on ultrasound and did not want to participate in the RCT. EVA was performed using a Karman cannula. Operative hysteroscopy consisted either of hysteroscopic morcellation with the TruClearTM System or the Intrauterine BIGATTI Shaver or cold loop resection with a bi-polar resectoscope.Results: Of 178 included women, 124 were treated with HR and 28 with EVA. Outcomes of HR and EVA did not differ significantly in terms of complications (5.6 % vs 3.6 %; p = 1.00). Second-look hysteroscopy showed IUAs in 14 of 91 women (15.4 %) after HR and in 1 of 16 (6.3 %) after EVA (p = .461). Completeness of removal was significantly higher (90.1 %) after HR than after EVA (68.8 %) (p = .035). Additional operative hysteroscopy was required in 14.3 % of the HR group versus 37.5 % in the EVA group (p = .036). Conclusion: In our cohort study, no significant differences in IUAs or complications were found. RPOC removal with HR was more often complete than removal with EVA, and additional therapeutic hysteroscopy was less frequently required after HR. These findings need to be correlated with those of RCTs. Clinical trial registration: The study was registered in de Dutch Trial Register (NTR4923). Date of registration 23-11-2014. Date of first enrollment 01-01-2015. https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR492

Ulipristal acetate vs gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists prior to laparoscopic myomectomy (MYOMEX trial): Short-term results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial

Introduction: Laparoscopic myomectomy can be difficult when fibroids are large and numerous. This may result in extensive intraoperative bleeding and the need for a conversion to a laparotomy. Medical pretreatment prior to surgery might reduce these risks by decreasing fibroid size and vascularization of the fibroid. We compared pretreatment with ulipristal acetate (UPA) vs gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) prior to laparoscopic myomectomy on several intra- and postoperative outcomes. Material and methods: We performed a non-inferiority double-blind randomized controlled trial in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Women were randomized between daily oral UPA for 12 weeks and single placebo injection or single intramuscular injection with leuprolide acetate and daily placebo tablets for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was intraoperative blood loss. Secondary outcomes were reduction of fibroid volume, suturing time, total surgery time and surgical ease. Results: Thirty women received UPA and 25 women leuprolide acetate. Non-inferiority of UPA regarding intraoperative blood loss was not demonstrated. When pretreated with UPA, median intraoperative blood loss was statistically significantly higher (525 mL [348-1025] vs 280 mL[100-500]; P = 0.011) and suturing time of the first fibroid was statistically significantly longer (40 minutes [28-48] vs 22 minutes [14-33]; P = 0.003) compared with GnRHa. Pretreatment with UPA showed smaller reduction in fibroid volume preoperatively compared with GnRHa (−7.2% [−35.5 to 54.1] vs −38.4% [−71.5 to −19.3]; P = 0.001). Laparoscopic myomectomies in women pretreated with UPA were subjectively judged more difficult than in women pretreated with GnRHa. Conclusions: Non-inferiority of UPA in terms of intraoperative blood loss could not be established, possibly due to the preliminary termination of the study. Pretreatment with GnRHa was more favorable than UPA in terms of fibroid volume reduction, intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin drop directly postoperatively, suturing time of the first fibroid and several subjective surgical ease parameters