BACKGROUND; Ultrasound-guided transvaginal oocyte retrieval is often performed under local anaesthesia on an outpatient basis. The objective of this study was to compare the overall pain experience of a newly designed reduced needle (RN) compared with a thicker standard needle (SN).
Methods: A prospective, randomized, multi-centre study was performed at four different clinics from June to December 2009. The oocyte aspiration was performed under local anaesthesia, either with a needle with a reduced diameter (0.9 mm) for the last 50 mm from the tip (RN) or with a SN (1.4 mm). A total of 257 patients were randomized (RN: n = 129; SN: n = 128). The primary endpoint was the overall pain experience self-assessed and registered by the patient on a visual analogue scale (VAS 0 mm = no pain to 100 mm = unbearable pain) immediately after the oocyte retrieval. Secondary end-points such as vaginal bleeding and several embryological parameters were also registered.
Results: The overall pain during the oocyte retrieval procedure was significantly lower in the RN group than in the SN group (mean 21.0 mm, SD 17.5 mm and median 19.0 mm versus mean 26.0 mm, SD 19.9 mm and median 24.0 mm; P = 0.040, difference between groups mean-5.0 mm, 95% CI: 9.7 to-0.4). This was also true when adjusting for baseline characteristics such as number of follicles, number of previous oocyte pick-up, body mass index and age, by a multiple linear regression analysis. Significantly more patients (40 of 126) had less than expected vaginal bleeding in the RN group when compared with the SN group (24 of 124; 32 versus 19%; P = 0.03 and 95% CI 1.7-23.0%). No differences were found between the two needles with regard to additional i.v. analgesia, aspiration time, oocyte recovery, fertilization, cleavage rate, number of good quality embryos, number of embryos for freezing and pregnancy rate.
Conclusions: Oocyte aspiration performed with the newly designed thinner-tipped needle resulted in significantly less overall pain and less vaginal bleeding, without prolonging the retrieval procedure or influence the oocyte recovery rate, when compared with a SN. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00924885.