Introduction: The efficacy of intra-arterial lidocaine for pain control of uterine artery embolization remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of intra-arterial lidocaine versus placebo on the postoperative pain intensity of uterine artery embolization.
Methods: We searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through April 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of intra-arterial lidocaine versus placebo on pain control of uterine artery embolization. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.
Results: Three RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for uterine artery embolization, intra-arterial lidocaine was associated with substantially reduced pain scores at 4 h (SMD = -0.85; 95% CI = -1.31 to -0.38; p = .0003) and analgesic consumption (SMD = -0.84; 95% CI = -1.26 to -0.42; p < .0001), but has no obvious influence on pain scores at 7 h (SMD = -0.19; 95% CI = -0.63 to 0.25; p = .40) or pain scores at 24 h (SMD = -0.55; 95% CI = -1.25 to 0.16; p = .13).
Conclusions: Intra-arterial lidocaine is effective for pain control after uterine artery embolization.
Keywords: Intra-arterial lidocaine; pain control; randomized controlled trials; uterine artery embolization.