Is it possible to predict office hysteroscopy failure?

Does “no-touch” technique hysteroscopy increase the risk of infection?

Objective:

Today, thanks to its many advantages, hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach (no-touch) is increasingly being used more in outpatient diagnoses and treatments. However, there are concerns that the “no-touch” technique increases ascending genital tract infections since a speculum is not inserted, and disinfection of the cervix cannot achieve.

Materials and Methods:

Between 2011 and 2017, 302 patients who underwent office hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach (group 1) and 254 patients who underwent hysteroscopy with the standard method under anesthesia in the operating room (group 2) were compared in terms of early complications (within two weeks postoperatively). The primary outcome was early postoperative infection, and the secondary outcome was other early complications, such as bleeding and rupture.

Results:

In this study, the success rate of hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach was 96.4%. According to the visual analog scale scoring system, 88.7% of the patients described mild-to-moderate pain. When group 1 and 2 were compared in terms of postoperative infection (3% and 2.4%, respectively) and other early complication rates (0% and 0.8%, respectively), no statistically significant difference was found (p>0.05).

Conclusion:

Hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach continues to be the gold standard method that is safe and well-tolerated by patients.

Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Perimenopausal Women: The Role of Hysteroscopy and Its Impact on Quality of Life and Sexuality

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a frequent symptom in perimenopausal women. It is defined as uterine bleeding in which the duration, frequency, or amount of bleeding is considered excessive and negatively affects the woman’s quality of life (QoL) and psychological well-being. In cases of structural uterine pathology, hysterectomy (usually performed via a minimally invasive approach) offers definitive symptom relief and is associated with long-lasting improvement of QoL and sexuality. However, over the past 30 years, uterus-preserving treatments have been introduced as alternatives to hysterectomy. Hysteroscopic polypectomy, myomectomy, or endometrial resection/endometrial ablation are minimally invasive techniques that can be used as an alternative to hysterectomy to treat AUB due to benign conditions. Although associated with high patient satisfaction and short-term improvement in their QoL, hysteroscopic treatments do not eliminate the risk of AUB recurrence or the need for further intervention. Therefore, considering the impact of different treatment options on QoL and sexuality during preoperative shared decision making could help identify the most appropriate and personalized treatment options for perimenopausal women suffering from AUB.

Diagnostic office hysteroscopy; why is it still painful procedure despite the surgical experience and mini-hysteroscope?

AIM

To evaluate the effect of cervical canal features on pain during outpatient hysteroscopy performed by experienced surgeons using mini-hysteroscope.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted on 303 women undergoing diagnostic hysteroscopy without anesthesia. Pain intensity was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) when the cervical canal was passed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the VAS score: painless or mild pain (VAS <4) and moderate or severe pain (VAS ≥ 4). The relationship between cervical canal characteristics (length, version, and flexion positions, history of cervical intervention, stenosis, synechiae), obstetric and gynecological history, preoperative anxiety level, procedure duration, and pain intensity was examined.

RESULTS

Moderate pain (4 ≤ VAS < 7) was observed in 38% of patients (n = 117) and 14 patients (5%) experienced severe pain (VAS ≥ 7). In multivariate analysis, nulliparity (p = 0.01; OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.7-13.2), postmenopausal state (p = 0.02; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3), excessive flexion of the cervix and retroverted uterus (p <0.001; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.0-8.5) were identified as risk factors for a painful procedure. Diagnostic hysteroscopy was successful in 98% of the patients. The pain was the primary cause of the failed hysteroscopy.

CONCLUSION

In addition to nulliparity and postmenopausal status, unfavorable features of the cervical canal, such as the excessive flexion position of the cervix and uterine retroversion are significant causes of pain during outpatient hysteroscopy.

Prediction models in gynaecology: Transparent reporting needed for clinical application

The clinical application of prediction models is increasing within the field of gynaecology and obstetrics. This is mostly due to the fact that clinicians and patients prefer individualized counselling and person specific, more objective outcome assessment. To prevent using inadequate models, it is important to construct and perform prediction model studies correctly. Therefore, the TRIPOD statement (the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) was developed. The aim of this review is to obtain an overview of the existing published prediction models for benign gynaecology and to investigate to what extent these studies meet the TRIPOD criteria. We performed a literature search in the databases PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to August 2020. Searching the cross-references of the relevant studies within our search identified additional articles. Publications were included if the aim of the study was to develop a multivariable prediction model within the field of benign gynaecology. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Analysis of the studies was performed by using a checklist derived from the TRIPOD criteria. Based on our search, 2487 studies were selected, including potential duplications. Eventually, a total of twenty-two studies were selected. 91% of these studies handled their predictors by univariable analysis before developing a multivariable prediction model. Fifteen studies described having missing data, but not all of them (9%) handled these missing data. Four different internal validation methods were used in twenty studies. Fifteen studies (68%) had prediction models with a C-index ≥ 0.7, which indicates a good model. Half of the studies (50%) did not measure the calibration, overall performance was described in two studies (9%). External validation was performed in 9% of the studies. The correct development of a prediction model within benign gynaecology and subsequent transparent reporting of the model development is important to facilitate clinical use. Without transparent reporting, wrong assumptions can be made leading to incorrect application of a specific prediction model. This overview shows that excepting carrying out an external validation, only one article met all the criteria. Therefore, we strongly recommend use of the TRIPOD criteria for developing and validating a prediction model (study). In addition, prior to publication, content experts should critically and statistically review the prediction model. If too many criteria are not met, refusing publication should be considered.

Office hysteroscopy in pre- and post-menopausal women: a predictive model

OBJECTIVES

To assess the variables associated with success of office hysteroscopy (OH) in pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women and to develop a clinical model for predicting the outcome of OH.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients (n = 3181) referred for an OH to a tertiary care university hospital between January 2018 and March 2020. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the variables for predicting the success of OH in all patients and in pre-menopausal and in post-menopausal patients separately. The logistic regression analysis of each variable was applied to develop a predictive model.

RESULTS

The overall success rate of the procedure was 92.2%; 95.4% in pre-menopausal women and 87.6% in post-menopausal women. In the general population, independent predictors of procedure success were previous vaginally delivery and hysteroscopy, while previous cervical or uterine surgery were associated with incomplete OH. In the pre-menopausal group, the independent predictors of failure were treatment with GnRH, estroprogestins and infertility. In 89% of cases, our developed model was able to predict whether an OH would be successful in a particular patient. ROC analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.8746 (95% CI: 0.85354-0.89557).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates the development of a simple and reliable clinical model for the identification of both pre-menopausal and menopausal patients with a high chance of OH success.

Patient and provider satisfaction with saline ultrasound versus office hysteroscopy for uterine cavity evaluation prior to in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To compare patient and provider satisfaction with saline ultrasound (SIS) versus office hysteroscopy for cavity evaluation prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and to assess the capability of hysteroscopy to manage pathology at time of diagnosis to reduce delays and supernumerary procedures.

METHODS

This was a randomized, controlled trial in a university fertility clinic. One hundred enrolled subjects undergoing routine uterine cavity evaluation prior to planned embryo transfer were randomized to SIS or office hysteroscopy without anesthesia. Subjects and providers completed surveys about their experience. Subjects with findings on SIS had a hysteroscopy performed or scheduled for further evaluation. Those with hysteroscopy findings had management attempted within the same procedure.

RESULTS

Overall patient satisfaction was high and did not differ between groups, while providers indicated that hysteroscopy provided a better cavity evaluation. There was no difference in time to complete procedures between groups. Pain score on a ten-scale was slightly higher in the hysteroscopy group compared to the SIS group (3.38 ± 1.85 vs. 2.44 ± 1.64, p < 0.01), but this did not impact satisfaction scores. Although pathology was found in a similar rate (22% vs. 36% for SIS and HSC groups, respectively), those in the SIS group all required secondary procedures, while only 1/17 did in the HSC group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Although the hysteroscopy group exhibited slightly higher pain scores, overall patient and provider satisfaction was high and similar between groups. There were significantly fewer secondary procedures and delays in the hysteroscopy group. Hysteroscopy is a reasonable first line screening tool for patients requiring cavity evaluation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04415489.