CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03027661Updated Nov 15, 2018Results posted

Para-cervical Block Prior to Laparoscopic Hysterectomy as an Adjuvant Treatment to Reduce Postoperative Pain.

A Phase 3 interventional study of Bupivacaine and 0.9% Sodium Chloride in Pain, Postoperative, sponsored by University of Tennessee. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-11-15.

Sponsored by University of Tennessee · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
41
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 60 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This is a prospective randomized controlled trial in which patients that are scheduled to undergo a laparoscopic hysterectomy would be allocated to one of two groups: Paracervical block with local anesthetic (bupivacaine 0.5%), or placebo. This would be achieved using block randomization. The intervention would be performed after the patient is under general anesthesia, prior to starting the surgery. Patients would be consented in the office or preoperative area (before receiving sedatives). As far as the intervention itself, it would consist of injecting 5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine into the cervical stroma at 3 and 9 o'clock, which is standard technique for para-cervical block. The remainder of the procedure will then continue in a regular fashion. Alternatively, patients in the control group will be injected with 5 mL of normal saline. The surgeon would be blinded as to patient allocation. Research staff will have previously prepared the formulations (saline or bupivacaine) and have sent them to the operating room prior to beginning the procedure depending on assigned group. At the end of the case, pain will be assessed using a visual analogue scale with a range from 0 to 10 by one of the researches who will also be blinded to the group. This will be done at 30 and 60 minutes after surgical stop time. Additional pain control in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) will be standardized to all patients.

Hypothesis:

Performing a para-cervical block with local anesthetic prior to a laparoscopic hysterectomy significantly reduces pain after the procedure

Read the detailed description

Specific aims:

-Determine if infiltrating the cervical stroma with local anesthetic prior to performing a hysterectomy will reduce postoperative pain scores, and hence increase patient satisfaction.

Secondary aims:

  • Determine if there is a difference in baseline pain depending on additional procedures performed, and their response to the paracervical block.
  • Determine if there is a difference in response to paracervical block based on history of cesarean deliveries or uterine weight.

Background/Significance:

Hysterectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the United States, with more than 600,000 done annually. Over the last decade, there has been major changes in regards to the surgical approach utilized. With the advent of laparoscopy and robotic surgery, the rate of procedures done vaginally or abdominally has decreased significantly. One of the major drivers to this change is the demand for a faster recovery and decreased postoperative discomfort. Additionally, several adjuvant methods such as a TAP (transverse abdominal plain) block, ERAS (expedited recovery after surgery) pathway, etc. have been developed in order to minimize pain after surgery and hence increase patient satisfaction. Paracervical block is a particular technique that has been evaluated in multiple studies as a way to reduce pain after vaginal surgery. Studies have been successful in demonstrating an improvement in pain scores after these types of procedures. However, to our knowledge, there has never been follow-up to evaluate this method during the laparoscopic approach, with or without robotic assistance. The rationale of why this technique may be beneficial during a hysterectomy is that after infiltrating the cervical stroma with local anesthetic, it will diffuse towards the pelvic sidewalls via the lymphatic and capillary systems, which would allow for the anesthetic agent to come in direct contact with the nerve plexuses that innervate the pelvic structures. Safety of the technique has been proven over the years, given that it is widely used during office procedures that involve manipulation of the cervix. Although much of the focus regarding reducing postoperative pain has been centered on the abdominal wall and port sites, it is undeniable that a significant portion of pain actually arises from the pelvic surgical site; particularly since laparoscopic trocars have become smaller, resulting in less trauma. Our aim is to determine if infiltrating the cervical stroma with local anesthetic prior to performing a hysterectomy will reduce postoperative pain scores, and hence increase patient satisfaction.

Methods

Study design

This is a prospective randomized controlled trial in which patients that are scheduled to undergo a laparoscopic hysterectomy would be allocated to one of two groups: Paracervical block with local anesthetic (bupivacaine 0.5%), or placebo. This would be achieved using block randomization. The intervention would be performed after the patient is under general anesthesia, prior to starting the surgery. Patients would be consented in the office or preoperative area (before receiving sedatives). As far as the intervention itself, it would consist of injecting 10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine into the cervical stroma at 3 and 9 o'clock, which is standard technique for para-cervical block. The remainder of the procedure will then continue in a regular fashion. Alternatively, patients in the control group will be injected with 10 mL of normal saline. The surgeon would be blinded as to patient allocation. The formulations (saline or bupivacaine) will be previously prepared in a syringe in the operating room by a member of the research time prior to beginning the procedure. At the end of the case, pain will be assessed using a visual analogue scale with a range from 0 to 10 (Wong-Baker faces - appendix 1) by one of the researches who will also be blinded to the group. This will be done at 30 and 60 minutes after surgical stop time. Additional pain control in the PACU will be standardized to all patients.

Study Subjects

Subjects will be selected based mainly on the fact they are undergoing a hysterectomy.

Sample Size

Investigators expect to detect a 25% reduction in pain reported on the visual analogue scale (VAS). Based on previous publications, it was determined that the mean VAS pain score after a laparoscopic hysterectomy is 5 with a standard deviation of 1.5. In order to detect the expected change after the proposed intervention, with a significance level of 5% and a power of 80%, a sample of 46 patients is required.

Data Collection

Data points to be collected are as follows:

  • Age
  • BMI
  • Operating time
  • History of cesarean deliveries
  • Preoperative indication for surgery (pain, prolapse, tumor, bleeding, etc)
  • Procedures performed (if ovaries/tubes were removed, if robotic assistance was used, if any additional procedures that are exceptions from the exclusion criteria were performed).
  • Specimen weight
  • Uterine pathology
  • Pain score at 30 minutes (see appendix 1 for Wong-Baker scale)
  • Pain score at 60 minutes
  • Number of days in the hospital (zero if discharged on same-day)

Data Handling

A master key will be generated during randomization. It will contain patient initials and medical record number, and an individual code. Only the primary investigator will have access to this master key. A separate de-identified database using the individual code as index will be used for collection of all data points. The data that can be collected on the day of surgery (baseline characteristics, operating time, pain scores, etc) will be collected that day using a standardized form (appendix 2). This will later be transferred to the de-identified database. Using the master key, investigators will research pathology reports when available to complete final data points (uterine weight, histology, etc).

The data-collection sheets will be destroyed as soon as they are transferred into the de-identified database.

Data Analysis

Investigators will use T-Student tests to assure groups are homogenous to age, BMI, operating time, history of cesarean deliveries, and uterine weight. ChiSquare and Ancova analysis will be utilized to determine if there is a significant difference in reported pain scores between groups. Investigators will also stratify subjects based on uterine weight, history of cesarean delivery, additional procedures, etc. and determine if this has an effect on the reported pain scores.

Time Frame

Investigators expect to be able to consent and enroll at least two patients per week (average range of hysterectomy procedures per week from the surgeons that will participate is 5-10). Investigators expect the data collection phase to span over 30 weeks approximately.

Strength/Innovation

Patient satisfaction is a center point in today's healthcare. Faster recovery with less discomfort is not only standard of care, but may also translate into major economic advantages, such as less narcotic use and a decreased rate of postoperative admission. Using this technique as an adjuvant treatment for pain after laparoscopic hysterectomies has never been explored. There is data published for similar procedures, which demonstrates a clear benefit. If this study demonstrates significant improvement in pain scores, it has the potential to change standard of care for pain control during hysterectomy procedures.

Limitations

The main confounding factors are difference in operating style between surgeons and baseline surgical characteristics (large uteri that may require more dissection and tissue manipulation, etc.). To control for this investigators are only recruiting patients from 3 surgeons who have a similar operating technique. In addition to this, investigators are documenting operating time and specimen weight, which can be used to compare both groups and assure that they are homogeneous to these potential confounders. Further analysis will also be made specifically stratifying the data based on these characteristics.

Risks

The risks of the procedure are minimal. Regarding possible adverse reactions to the local anesthetic, there is no additional risk given that this is already routinely administered during surgery. Patients will be screened to confirm they do not have a history of allergies to the medication. Possible reactions include hypotension, bradycardia, headaches, tremors, etc. The paracervical block is routinely performed in the office setting before most invasive procedures involving the cervix, and risks are minimal, similar to those involving any subdermal injection. Possible risks include bleeding from injection site.

There is also the potential risk of accidental disclosure of the health information that will be collected.

Benefits

This study may find new methods of improving postoperative analgesia for patients undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy procedures which may lead to less narcotic use, faster discharge from hospital, and greater satisfaction.

Costs

There is no additional costs. Local anesthetic and saline are products that are routinely used during all laparoscopic hysterectomy surgeries. The additional operating time it would take to perform the block is also negligible, since it is a procedure that can be accomplished in less than 2 minutes.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pain, Postoperative

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • para-cervical block
  • laparoscopic hysterectomy
03

In context

Pain, Postoperative

5,093 studies on the registry are indexed under Pain, Postoperative; 1,140 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 41 is below the median of 75 across 4,344 interventional studies indexed under Pain, Postoperative.

Browse Pain, Postoperative studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Tennessee is the lead sponsor of 139 studies on the registry; 21 are open to participants now.

Of its 7 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (29%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 60 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with or without salpingoophorectomy for benign indications
  • Undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with robotic assistance with or without salpingoophorectomy for benign indications
  • Between 18 and 60 years of age

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Intraoperative detection of malignancy
  • Undergoing additional procedures at the time of surgery (except prophylactic McCall culdoplasty/uterosacral ligament suspension, excision of endometriosis, appendectomy, cystoscopy)
  • Inability to perform paracervical block due to anatomic abnormalities (absent/flush cervix)
  • Known allergy/sensitivity to bupivacaine
  • Intraoperative bowel injury, bladder injury, ureter injury or major vessel injury that required repair.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
41 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Placebo comparator
    Control Group

    Injection of 10 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride into the cervical stroma divided between 3 and 9 o'clock

    Drug: 0.9% Sodium Chloride

  • Active comparator
    Study Group

    Injection of 10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine into the cervical stroma divided between 3 and 9 o'clock.

    Drug: Bupivacaine

Interventions

  • DrugBupivacaine

    Inject 10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine into cervical stroma

    Also known as: Marcaine, Sensorcaine

  • Drug0.9% Sodium Chloride

    Inject 10 mL of 0.9% NaCl into cervical stroma

    Also known as: Normal Saline

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 30 Minutes Postoperative

    Scale used is the Visual analogue scale for pain. Scale ranges from 0 being no pain, to 10 being worse pain ever experienced.

    Time frame: 30 minutes post-operative stop time

  2. Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 60 Minutes Postoperative

    Postoperative pain score on the Visual analgoue scale at 60 minutes from surgical stop time. Scale ranges from 0 being no pain, to 10 being worse pain ever experienced.

    Time frame: 60 minutes

07

Results

Posted Nov 15, 2018

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneControl GroupStudy Group
Started2021
Completed2021
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryPain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 30 Minutes Postoperative

Scale used is the Visual analogue scale for pain. Scale ranges from 0 being no pain, to 10 being worse pain ever experienced.

Time frame:
30 minutes post-operative stop time
Reported as:
Mean · VAS scale 0-10
Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 30 Minutes Postoperative
VAS scale 0-10Control GroupStudy Group
Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 30 Minutes Postoperative5.7 ± 2.83.2 ± 3.4
PrimaryPain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 60 Minutes Postoperative

Postoperative pain score on the Visual analgoue scale at 60 minutes from surgical stop time. Scale ranges from 0 being no pain, to 10 being worse pain ever experienced.

Time frame:
60 minutes
Reported as:
Mean · VAS scale 0-10
Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 60 Minutes Postoperative
VAS scale 0-10Control GroupStudy Group
Pain Reported on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 60 Minutes Postoperative5.9 ± 3.02.3 ± 2.8

Adverse events

Collected over 30 days from enrollment. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Control Group0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)
Study Group0/21 (0%)0/21 (0%)0/21 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
<=18 years000
Between 18 and 65 years202141
>=65 years000
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
Mean46.50 ± 9.846 ± 10.446.24 ± 10.0
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
Female202141
Male000
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
Count of participants——0
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
United States202141
BMI
BMI(kg/m^2)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
Mean35.05 ± 9.832.75 ± 9.833.87 ± 9.7
history of csection
history of csection(Participants)Control GroupStudy GroupTotal
Count of participants11819
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Erlanger Medical Center
    Chattanooga, Tennessee 37403, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Acton JN, Salfinger SG, Tan J, Cohen PA. Outcomes of Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Using a 5-mm Versus 10-mm Laparoscope: A Randomized Control Trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Jan;23(1):101-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.09.001. Epub 2015 Sep 11. PubMed 26371370 ↗
  • Centini G, Calonaci A, Lazzeri L, Tosti C, Palomba C, Puzzutiello R, Luisi S, Petraglia F, Zupi E. Parenterally administered moderate sedation and paracervical block versus general anesthesia for hysteroscopic polypectomy: a pilot study comparing postoperative outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 Feb;22(2):193-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.09.008. Epub 2014 Nov 13. PubMed 25265887 ↗
  • Donnez O, Donnez J, Dolmans MM, Dethy A, Baeyens M, Mitchell J. Low Pain Score After Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Same-Day Discharge Within Less Than 5 Hours: Results of a Prospective Observational Study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 Nov-Dec;22(7):1293-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.06.021. Epub 2015 Jul 11. PubMed 26169246 ↗
  • Golembiewski J, Dasta J. Evolving Role of Local Anesthetics in Managing Postsurgical Analgesia. Clin Ther. 2015 Jun 1;37(6):1354-71. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.03.017. Epub 2015 Apr 10. PubMed 25866297 ↗
  • Long JB, Eiland RJ, Hentz JG, Mergens PA, Magtibay PM, Kho RM, Magrina JF, Cornella JL. Randomized trial of preemptive local analgesia in vaginal surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009 Jan;20(1):5-10. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0716-6. Epub 2008 Oct 2. PubMed 18830553 ↗
  • Ng A, Swami A, Smith G, Davidson AC, Emembolu J. The analgesic effects of intraperitoneal and incisional bupivacaine with epinephrine after total abdominal hysterectomy. Anesth Analg. 2002 Jul;95(1):158-62, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200207000-00028. PubMed 12088961 ↗
  • O'Neal MG, Beste T, Shackelford DP. Utility of preemptive local analgesia in vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Dec;189(6):1539-41; discussion 1541-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2003.10.691. PubMed 14710057 ↗
  • Penninx JP, Mol BW, Bongers MY. Endometrial ablation with paracervical block. J Reprod Med. 2009 Oct;54(10):617-20. PubMed 20677480 ↗
  • Skensved H. Combining Paracervical Block With a Complete Fundal Block Significantly Reduces Patients' Perception of Pain During Radio-Frequency Endometrial Ablation in an Office Setting. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 Nov-Dec;22(6S):S45. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.08.124. Epub 2015 Oct 15. No abstract available. PubMed 27679246 ↗
  • Tangsiriwatthana T, Sangkomkamhang US, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Paracervical local anaesthesia for cervical dilatation and uterine intervention. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 30;(9):CD005056. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005056.pub3. PubMed 24085642 ↗
  • ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Nov;114(5):1156-1158. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c33c72. PubMed 20168127 ↗
  • Wong-Baker FACES Foundation (2016). Wong-Baker FACES® Pain Rating Scale. Retrieved 11/10/2016 with permission from http://www.WongBakerFACES.org
  • Mercier RJ, Zerden ML. Intrauterine anesthesia for gynecologic procedures: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Sep;120(3):669-77. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182639ab5. PubMed 22914480 ↗
  • Radtke S, Boren T, Depasquale S. Paracervical Block as a Strategy to Reduce Postoperative Pain after Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Sep-Oct;26(6):1164-1168. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.12.001. Epub 2018 Dec 6. PubMed 30528725 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Dec 21, 2017

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 15, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03027661
Lead sponsor
University of Tennessee
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 23, 2017
Start date
Aug 1, 2017
Primary completion
Jun 30, 2018
Completion
Jun 30, 2018
Results posted
Nov 15, 2018
Last update
Nov 15, 2018

Study contacts

Steven J Radtke, MD
principal investigator · UT College of Medicine MIGS Fellow & Faculty

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion