Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Christiaens, F.
Right arrow Articles by Camu, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Christiaens, F.
Right arrow Articles by Camu, F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol 13, 2456-2460, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press

ARTICLES

Comparison of assisted reproductive technology performance after oocyte retrieval under general anaesthesia (propofol) versus paracervical local anaesthetic block: a case-controlled study

F Christiaens, C Janssenswillen, AC Van Steirteghem, P Devroey, C Verborgh and F Camu
Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital, Dutch-speaking Brussels Free University (Vrije Universiteit Brussel), Belgium.

Propofol (Dipirivan) is an intravenous anaesthetic drug used for general anaesthesia. Although frequently used as a general anaesthetic for ultrasound procedures, its use during transvaginal oocyte retrieval is currently being debated. A total of 202 patients undergoing fertility treatment was included in a prospective, matched, controlled study, in which we compared fertilization rates and embryo development in terms of morphological quality and speed of development and the implications for reproductive outcome and pregnancy following general anaesthesia using either propofol or a paracervical local anaesthetic block during oocyte collection. There were no differences between the fertilization rates and the embryo cleavage characteristics for the two groups. The initial implantation rate per transferred embryo after general anaesthesia was similar to that after paracervical local anaesthetic block (13.4 versus 18.6%; P = 0.10). The ongoing clinical implantation rates per embryo transferred were also similar in the two groups.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
I. H. Lok, M. T.V. Chan, D. L.W. Chan, L.P. Cheung, C. J. Haines, and P.M. Yuen
A prospective randomized trial comparing patient-controlled sedation using propofol and alfentanil and physician-administered sedation using diazepam and pethidine during transvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2002; 17(8): 2101 - 2106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
I. Ben-Shlomo, R. Moskovich, Y. Katz, and E. Shalev
Midazolam/ketamine sedative combination compared with fentanyl/propofol/isoflurane anaesthesia for oocyte retrieval
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 1999; 14(7): 1757 - 1759.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.