Franchini M, Ceci O, Casadio P, Carugno J, Giarrè G, Gubbini G, Catena U, Chiara de Angelis M, Di Spiezio Sardo A. Mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal or hysteroscopic morcellator: understanding the past to predict the future. A narrative review.
Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2021;
13:193-201. [PMID:
34555873 PMCID:
PMC8823270 DOI:
10.52054/fvvo.13.3.026]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Background
In recent years, the available evidence revealed that mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal (mHTR) systems represent a safe and effective alternative to conventional operative resectoscopic hysteroscopy to treat a diverse spectrum of intrauterine pathology including endometrial polyps, uterine myomas, removal of placental remnants and to perform targeted endometrial biopsy under direct visualisation. This innovative technology simultaneously cuts and removes the tissue, allowing one to perform the procedure in a safer, faster and more effective way compared to conventional resectoscopic surgery.
Objective
To review currently available scientific evidence concerning the use of mechanical hysteroscopic morcellators and highlight relevant aspects of the technology.
Material and Methods
A narrative review was conducted analysing the available literature regarding hysteroscopic tissue removal systems.
Main outcome measures
Characteristics of available mHTR systems, procedures they are used for, their performance including safety aspects and their comparison.
Results
A total of 7 hysteroscopic morcellators were identified. The diameter of the external sheet ranged from 5.25 to 9.0 mm, optics ranged from 0.8 to 6.3 mm with 0o angle. The cutter device diameter ranged from 2.9 to 4.5 mm most of them with rotation and reciprocation.
Conclusion
We conclude that the adoption of mHTR has shown to reduce operating time, simultaneously cutting and suctioning tissue fragments avoiding the need for multiple removal and reinsertions of the device into the uterine cavity as well as reducing the volume of distension media required to complete the procedure compared to using the hysteroscopic resectoscope.
Collapse