The use of chorionic villus biopsy catheters for saline infusion sonohysterography

Sonohysterographic endometrial sampling and hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy: a comparative study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the quantity and quality of endometrial tissue sampled at saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH) with that obtained by directed endometrial biopsy by operative hysteroscopy in patients with diffusely thickened and/or inhomogeneous endometrium at SCSH. A secondary aim was a comparison of the extent of procedure-related pain.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-eight patients with diffusely thickened (> 4 mm) and/or inhomogeneous endometrium at SCSH were prospectively recruited. Endometrial sampling was performed at the end of SCSH using the same 4.7-mm intrauterine catheter that had been used for saline instillation. These samples were compared to directed endometrial biopsies obtained with the guidance of an office 5-mm hysteroscope. After hysteroscopy, an extended guided curettage was performed under general anesthesia, providing specimens that were considered the gold standard for histological diagnosis. Endometrial specimen area (mm(2)), histologic concordance and procedure related pain (10-cm VAS) were compared for the two techniques.

RESULTS

The median age of 88 pre- and of 40 post-menopausal patients was 41 (interquartile range, 34-48) years and 57 (interquartile range, 52-67) years, respectively. The median area of endometrial specimen obtained by SCSH was 25.1 (interquartile range, 12.4-52.3) mm(2) and was not significantly different from that obtained by hysteroscopy (16.9 (interquartile range, 10.0-52.7) mm(2)). The K values of the two different techniques for typical hyperplasia (n = 61) and for premalignant and malignant lesions (n = 26) were 0.91 and 0.94, respectively. Procedure-related pain was not significantly different between pre- and postmenopausal patients for both sampling techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

SCSH with sampling proved to be as good as and as tolerable as hysteroscopic biopsy in cases with diffusely thickened and/or inhomogeneous endometrium. Both these imaging and biopsy techniques should be considered a reliable outpatient procedure in the management of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[Hysterosonography]

Hysterosonography, which consists in the injection of some cc of saline in the uterine cavity during sonography, allows an exploration of the uterine cavity and of the endometrium. Accuracy of hysterosonography is similar to that of office hysteroscopy. Hysterosonography distinguishes normal cavities from pathologic ones, endometrial atrophy from mucosal anomalies, polyps from myomas. Conversely, endometrial biopsy is still necessary for diagnosis of hyperplasia or cancer. Hysterosonography can also be proposed for first trimester bleedings, trophoblast retention or ectopic pregnancy. In the near future it could be applied to therapeutic goals such as sonographic section of polyps.

A comparison of outpatient hysteroscopy with saline infusion hysterosonography

OBJECTIVES

To establish the accuracy of saline infusion hysterosonography in diagnosing uterine pathology when compared with outpatient hysteroscopy.

DESIGN

Prospective, parallel, blinded comparative study.

SETTING

Outpatient hysteroscopy clinic in a large university teaching hospital.

POPULATION

All women referred for outpatient hysteroscopy in a 15-month period.

INTERVENTIONS

Women underwent saline infusion hysterosonography followed by flexible hysteroscopy. The ultrasonographer was blinded to the hysteroscopy result and the gynaecologist was blinded to the saline infusion hysterosonography result.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The relative success rates and pain scores for each procedure. The validity of saline infusion hysterosonography as a diagnostic test.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen women entered the study; 70 women were premenopausal and 47 postmenopausal. In 27 women, one or both procedures could not be performed. Saline infusion hysterosonography failed in 20 women, on one occasion hysteroscopy failed and both investigations failed in six women. Ninety cases remained for direct comparison, with 78 cases of agreement on the uterine findings in both investigations. Twelve cases disagreed; in one case, an adhesion was seen, two cases with polyps and five with fibroids seen on ultrasound but not seen on hysteroscopy. There were four cases where polyps were identified on hysteroscopy but not on saline infusion hysterosonography. The median pain scores were 1.6 for saline infusion hysterosonography and 3.2 for hysteroscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Both saline infusion hysterosonography and hysteroscopy are well tolerated by women. Saline infusion hysterosonography has a high failure rate but has a lower pain score than hysteroscopy.

Determining the best catheter for sonohysterography

OBJECTIVE

To compare the characteristics of six different catheters for performing sonohysterography (SHG) to identify those that offer the best compromise between reliability, tolerability, and cost.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENT(S)

Six hundred ten women undergoing SHG.

INTERVENTION(S)

We performed SHG with six different types of catheters: Foleycath (Wembley Rubber Products, Sepang, Malaysia), Hysca Hysterosalpingography Catheter (GTA International Medical Devices S.A., La Caleta D.N., Dominican Republic), H/S Catheter Set (Ackrad Laboratories, Cranford, NJ), PBN Balloon Hystero-Salpingography Catheter (PBN Medicals, Stenloese, Denmark), ZUI-2.0 Catheter (Zinnanti Uterine Injection; BEI Medical System International, Gembloux, Belgium), and Goldstein Catheter (Cook, Spencer, IN).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

We assessed the reliability, the physician's ease of use, the time requested for the insertion of the catheter, the volume of contrast medium used, the tolerability for the patients, and the cost of the catheters.

RESULT(S)

In 568 (93%) correctly performed procedures, no statistically significant differences were found among the catheters. The Foleycath was the most difficult for the physician to use and required significantly more time to position correctly. The Goldstein catheter was the best tolerated by the patients. The Foleycath was the cheapest whereas the PBN Balloon was the most expensive.

CONCLUSION(S)

The choice of the catheter must be targeted to achieving a good balance between tolerability for the patients, efficacy, cost, and the personal preference of the operator.