Hysteroscopic morcellation versus bipolar resection for removal of type 0 and 1 submucous myomas: A randomized trial

Evaluation of whether there is residual polyp tissue after hysteroscopic morcellation at Cam and Sakura City Hospital: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In polypectomy with mechanical hysteroscopic morcellators, the tissue removal procedure continues until no polyp tissue remains. The decision that the polypoid tissues were removed completely is made based on visual evaluation. In a situation where the polyp tissue was visually completely removed and no doubt that the polyp has been completely removed, short spindle-like tissue fragments on the polyp floor continue in most patients. There are no studies in the literature on whether visual evaluation provides adequate information at the cellular level in many patients in whom polypoid tissues have been determined to be completely removed. The aim of the present study was to analyze the pathological results of the curettage procedure, which was applied following the completion of polyp removal with operative hysteroscopy, and to evaluate whether there was residual polyp tissue in the short spindle-like tissue fragments that the mechanical hysteroscopic morcellator could not remove. The secondary aims of this study were to compare conventional loop resection hysteroscopy with hysteroscopic morcellation for the removal of endometrial polyps in terms of hemoglobin/hematocrit changes, polypectomy time and the amount of medium deficit.

METHODS

A total of 70 patients with a single pedunculate polypoid image of 1.5-2 cm, which was primarily visualized by office hysteroscopy, were included in the study. Patients who had undergone hysteroscopic polypectomy were divided into two groups according to the surgical device used: the morcellator group (n = 35, Group M) and the resectoscope group (n = 35, Group R). The histopathological results of hysteroscopic specimens and curettage materials of patients who had undergone curettage at the end of operative hysteroscopy were evaluated. In addition, the postoperative 24th hour Hb/HCT decrease amounts in percentage, the polypectomy time which was measured from the start of morcellation, and deficit differences were compared between groups.

RESULTS

In total, 7 patients in the morcellator group had residual polyp tissue detected in the full curettage material. The blood loss was lower in the morcellator group than in the resectoscope group (M, R; (-0.07 ± 0.08), (-0,11 ± 0.06), (p < 0.05), respectively). The deficit value of the morcellator group were higher (M, R; (500 ml), (300 ml), (p < 0.05), respectively). The polypectomy time was shorter in the morcellator group (M, R; mean (2.30 min), (4.6 min), (p < 0.05)).

CONCLUSIONS

Even if the lesion is completely visibly removed during hysteroscopic morcellation, extra caution should be taken regarding the possibility of residual tissue. There is a need for new studies investigating the presence of residual polyp tissue.

Guideline No. 446: Hysteroscopic Surgery in Fertility Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the indications, benefits, and risks of hysteroscopy in the management of patients with infertility and provide guidance to gynaecologists who manage common conditions in these patients.

TARGET POPULATION

Patients with infertility (inability to conceive after 12 months of unprotected intercourse) undergoing investigation and treatment.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Hysteroscopic surgery can be used to diagnose the etiology of infertility and improve fertility treatment outcomes. All surgery has risks and associated complications. Hysteroscopic surgery may not always improve fertility outcomes. All procedures have costs, which are borne either by the patient or their health insurance provider.

EVIDENCE

We searched English-language articles from January 2010 to May 2021 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (see Appendix B for MeSH search terms).

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Gynaecologists who manage common conditions in patients with infertility.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

When offering hysteroscopic surgery to patients with infertility, ensure it improves the live birth rate.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Uterine artery embolization combined with percutaneous microwave ablation for the treatment of prolapsed uterine submucosal leiomyoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Vaginal myomectomy is the most common form of radical treatment for prolapsed submucosal leiomyoma and is typically performed under general anesthesia. However, an alternative treatment approach is needed for patients who cannot tolerate general anesthesia. We describe a case with such a patient who was successfully treated via a minimally invasive method under local anesthesia.

CASE SUMMARY

A 46-year-old female suffered from abnormal uterine bleeding, severe anemia, and a reduced quality of life attributed to a massive prolapsed submucosal leiomyoma. She could not tolerate general anesthesia due to a congenital thoracic malformation and cardiopulmonary insufficiency. A new individualized combined treatment, consisting uterine artery embolization (UAE), percutaneous microwave ablation (PMWA) of the pedicle and the endometrium, and transvaginal removal of the leiomyoma by twisting, was performed. The lesion was completely removed successfully under local anesthesia without any major complications. The postoperative follow-up showed complete symptom relief and a significant improvement in the quality of life.

CONCLUSION

UAE combined with PMWA can be performed under local anesthesia and is a promising alternative treatment for patients who cannot tolerate general anesthesia.

Guideline No. 435: Minimally Invasive Surgery in Fertility Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits and risks of minimally invasive procedures in the management of patients with infertility and provide guidance to gynaecologists who manage common conditions in these patients.

TARGET POPULATION

Patients with infertility (inability to conceive after 12 months of unprotected intercourse) undergoing investigation and treatment.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Minimally invasive reproductive surgery can be used to treat infertility, improve fertility treatment outcomes, or preserve fertility. All surgery has risks and associated complications. Reproductive surgery may not improve fertility outcomes and may, in some instances, damage ovarian reserve. All procedures have costs, which are borne either by the patient or their health insurance provider.

EVIDENCE

We searched English-language articles from January 2010 to May 2021 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (see Appendix A for MeSH search terms).

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix B (Tables B1 for definitions and B2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Gynaecologists who manage common conditions in patients with infertility.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Directive clinique no 435 : Chirurgie minimalement invasive dans les traitements de fertilité

OBJECTIF

Évaluer les risques et bénéfices de la chirurgie minimalement invasive dans la prise en charge des patientes atteintes d'infertilité et fournir des conseils aux gynécologues qui prennent en charge les problèmes les plus fréquents chez ces patientes.

POPULATION CIBLE

Patientes atteintes d'infertilité (incapacité à concevoir après 12 mois de rapports sexuels non protégés) en processus diagnostique ou sous traitement. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: On peut recourir à la chirurgie de la reproduction minimalement invasive pour traiter l'infertilité, améliorer les résultats des traitements de fertilité ou préserver la fertilité. Toutes les interventions chirurgicales comportent des risques et des complications associées. La chirurgie de la reproduction n'améliore pas toujours la fertilité et peut, dans certains cas, compromettre la réserve ovarienne. Toutes les interventions entraînent des coûts, lesquels sont assumés par la patiente ou son assureur. DONNéES PROBANTES: Des recherches ont été faites dans les bases de données PubMed-Medline, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus et Cochrane Library pour répertorier les articles publiés en anglais dans la période de janvier 2010 à mai 2021 (voir les termes de recherche MeSH à l'annexe A). MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe B en ligne (tableau B1 pour les définitions et tableau B2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Gynécologues qui prennent en charge les affections courantes chez les patientes atteintes d'infertilité. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.

HYSTEROSCOPIC MYOMECTOMY

Leiomyomas are the most common pelvic tumors. Submucosal fibroids are a common cause of abnormal bleeding and infertility. Hysteroscopic myomectomy is the definitive management of symptomatic submucosal fibroids, with high efficacy and safety. Several techniques have been introduced over time and will be covered in depth in this manuscript. Advances in optics, fluid management, electrosurgery, smaller diameter scopes, and tissue removal systems, along with improved training have contributed to improving the safety and efficiency of hysteroscopic myomectomy.

Comparison of Hysteroscopic Morcellation Versus Resectoscopy in Treatment of Patients with Endometrial Lesions: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND Hysteroscopic surgery has been widely used in clinical practice for more than 30 years due to its advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, and direct vision. The aim of this study was to compare hysteroscopic morcellation versus conventional resectoscopy for removal of endometrial lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS For the database search, we used the keywords "morcellator," "morcellators," "morcellate," "morcellation," and "morcellated" combined with "hysteroscopy," "hysteroscopy," "uteroscope," and "transcervical". The last search was conducted on February 1, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS According to our retrieval scheme and the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we found 6 studies including 565 patients. For enumeration data, we calculated the effect size as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI), while for quantitative data we used the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). There was no significant difference between success rate of hysteroscopic morcellation and conventional resectoscopy (relative risk and 95% confidence interval 1.05(0.97,1.13); P=0.232). Procedure time was also shorter with hysteroscopic morcellation, the procedure time of the hysteroscopic morcellation group was 3.43 min shorter compared with the conventional resectoscopy group, and the operating time in the hysteroscopic morcellation group was 2.81 min shorter. In terms of fluid deficit, there was no statistically significant difference in fluid loss between the 2 groups (P=0.209). CONCLUSIONS Hysteroscopic morcellation is associated with a shorter procedure time and operative time among patients with endometrial lesions compared with resectoscopy.

Choice of primary and secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials evaluating treatment for uterine fibroids: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Core outcome sets aim to reduce research heterogeneity and standardise reporting, allowing meaningful comparisons between studies.

OBJECTIVES

To report on outcomes used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating uterine fibroid treatments, towards the development of a core outcome set for fibroid research.

SELECTION STRATEGY

Database search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL (inception to July 2021) for all English-language RCTs involving surgical or radiological fibroid treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A total of 1885 texts were screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently according to PRISMA methodology. JADAD and Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in Cleft Palate (MOMENT) scores were used to assess methodological and outcome reporting quality of studies, respectively. Outcomes were mapped to nine domains. Non-parametric tests for correlation and to compare group medians were undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 23 primary outcomes (23 outcome measures) and 173 secondary outcomes (95 outcome measures) reported in 60 RCTs (5699 participants). The domains with highest frequency of primary outcomes reported were bleeding and quality of life (QoL). The most frequent primary outcomes were postoperative pain, QoL and menstrual bleeding. No primary outcomes were mapped to fertility domains. Median MOMENT outcome score was 5 (interquartile range 3). There was correlation between MOMENT outcome score and JADAD scores (r = 0.491, P = 0.0001), publishing journal impact factor (r = 0.419, P = 0.008) and publication year (r = 0.332, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

There is substantial variation in the outcomes reported in fibroid RCTs. There is a need for a core outcome set for fibroid research, to allow improved understanding regarding the effects of different treatments.

Hysteroscopic management of intrauterine benign diseases

Hysteroscopy is the gold-standard procedure for evaluating the vagina, cervix, cervical canal and uterine cavity, with a great possibility of identifying lesions and being able to treat them at the same time in a 'See and Treat' procedure. The presence of the operative channel allows directed biopsy and excision of part of the lesions. Hysteroscopic treatment can be offered in office and hospital settings. The main difference is the use of anesthesia for hospital hysteroscopy. Office hysteroscopy has as major challenge the patient's pain threshold and the size of the lesion base. The use of the appropriate technique allows the removal of lesions even in an outpatient setting. Hospital hysteroscopy allows the use of instruments with a larger diameter and with the use of associated energy. The development of new technologies has increased the spectrum of office hysteroscopy.

Focus on the Primary Prevention of Intrauterine Adhesions: Current Concept and Vision

Intrauterine adhesion (IUA), and its severe form Asherman syndrome (Asherman’s syndrome), is a mysterious disease, often accompanied with severe clinical problems contributing to a significant impairment of reproductive function, such as menstrual disturbance (amenorrhea), infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss. Among these, its correlated infertility may be one of the most challenging problems. Although there are many etiologies for the development of IUA, uterine instrumentation is the main cause of IUA. Additionally, more complicated intrauterine surgeries can be performed by advanced technology, further increasing the risk of IUA. Strategies attempting to minimize the risk and reducing its severity are urgently needed. The current review will expand the level of our knowledge required to face the troublesome disease of IUA. It is separated into six sections, addressing the introduction of the normal cyclic endometrial repairing process and its abruption causing the formation of IUA; the etiology and prevalence of IUA; the diagnosis of IUA; the classification of IUA; the pathophysiology of IUA; and the primary prevention of IUA, including (1) delicate surgical techniques, such as the use of surgical instruments, energy systems, and pre-hysteroscopic management, (2) barrier methods, such as gels, intrauterine devices, intrauterine balloons, as well as membrane structures containing hyaluronate–carboxymethylcellulose or polyethylene oxide–sodium carboxymethylcellulose as anti-adhesive barrier.