Prospective multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of office diagnostic hysteroscopy

Outpatient hysteroscopy impact on subsequent assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis in patients with normal transvaginal sonography or hysterosalpingography images

BACKGROUND

Standard management for intrauterine lesions typically involves initial imaging followed by operative hysteroscopy for suspicious findings. However, the efficacy of routine outpatient hysteroscopy in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) remains uncertain due to a lack of decisive high-quality evidence. This study aimed to determine whether outpatient hysteroscopy is beneficial for infertile women who have unremarkable imaging results prior to undergoing ART.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines, incorporating data up to May 31, 2023, from databases such as PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome assessed was the live birth rate, with secondary outcomes including chemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy rates, and miscarriage rates. Statistical analysis involved calculating risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals and assessing heterogeneity with the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

The analysis included ten randomized control trials. Receiving outpatient hysteroscopy before undergoing ART was associated with increased live birth (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.45, I2 61%) and clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.27 95% CI 1.10-1.47, I2 53%). Miscarriage rates did not differ significantly (RR 1.25, CI 0.90-1.76, I2 50%). Subgroup analyses did not show a significant difference in clinical pregnancy rates when comparing normal versus abnormal hysteroscopic findings (RR 1.01, CI 0.78-1.32, I2 38%). We analyzed data using both intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches, and our findings were consistent across both analytical methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Office hysteroscopy may enhance live birth and clinical pregnancy rates in infertile women undergoing ART, even when previous imaging studies show no apparent intrauterine lesions. Treating lesions not detected by imaging may improve ART outcomes. The most commonly missed lesions are endometrial polyps, submucosal fibroids and endometritis, which are all known to affect ART success rates. The findings suggested that hysteroscopy, given its diagnostic accuracy and patient tolerability, should be considered in the management of infertility.

DATABASE REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systemic Review database (CRD42023476403).

A novel technique of vagino-hysteroscopy using alginate gel interface: A proof of concept study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the feasibility of vagino-hysteroscopy using alginate gel Interface (VAGI) with conventional vaginoscopic hysteroscopy (CVH).

METHODS

Thirty women undergoing diagnostic vagino-hysteroscopy were randomly allocated into Group I (VAGI): Alginate occluder was used at introitus to facilitate hydrodistension during hysteroscopy; or Group II: Underwent no-touch hysteroscopy. Primary outcome was feasibility, defined as successful visualization of uterine cavity. Secondary outcomes included operative time, hydrostatic pressures for optimum visualization, pain experienced by patient on visual analog scale, maneuverability and surgeon satisfaction. Data analysis was performed using χ² and Fisher exact tests for qualitative variables and Student t test for quantitative variables.

RESULTS

VAGI was significantly better than CVH (80% vs. 33.3%; relative risk 8, P = 0.025). With VAGI, optimum visualization was achieved at significantly lower pressures at all levels (vagina, P = 0.034; cervix, P = 0.01; uterus, P < 0.001), in less time (P = 0.007), and using less irrigation fluid (P < 0.001). Surgeon satisfaction was significantly higher for VAGI (P = 0.009). Subgroup analysis showed higher likelihood of success of VAGI in women who were premenopausal (P = 0.015), younger than 45 years (P = 0.024), and had a history of vaginal birth (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

VAGI is quicker to perform and provides optimum visualization at much lower pressures than CVH. Use of alginate is patient friendly and yields higher surgeon satisfaction rate.

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.

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.

Uterine distension media for outpatient hysteroscopy

BACKGROUND

Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as carbon dioxide and liquid as saline that can be used at room temperature or warmed to body temperature. Both media offer advantages as well as disadvantages.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of gas (carbon dioxide) and liquid (normal saline) used for uterine distension during outpatient hysteroscopy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 28 April 2021. We checked references of relevant trials and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. CINAHL records and ongoing trials from the trial registries were included in the CENTRAL search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saline with carbon dioxide, as well as RCTs comparing saline at different temperatures, for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy done for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were patient tolerability and adverse events or complications related to the distending medium. Secondary outcomes were quality of the hysteroscopic view and duration of the procedure.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (1946 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high: the main limitations were risk of bias due to absence of blinding due to the nature of the procedure, imprecision, and inconsistency. Saline versus carbon dioxide Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in pain scores during the procedure between saline and carbon dioxide, but the quality of evidence was low (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.02; 9 RCTs, N = 1705; I² = 86%). This translates to differences of 0.39 cm (lower) and 0.05 cm (higher) on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Evidence was insufficient to show differences between groups in the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.42; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether saline decreases the need for analgesia compared to carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). Saline compared to carbon dioxide is probably associated with fewer vasovagal reaction events (Peto OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; 6 RCTs, N = 1076; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer shoulder-tip pain events (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 RCTs, N = 623; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 10% of women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy experience a vasovagal reaction event with the use of carbon dioxide, this rate would be between 3% and 9% with the use of saline. Similarly, if the rate of shoulder-tip pain with carbon dioxide is 9%, it would be between 1% and 5% with saline. We are uncertain whether saline is similar to carbon dioxide in terms of endometrial bleeding (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.75; 2 RCTs, N = 349; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Infection was not reported by any study in this comparison. Saline may result in fewer procedures with an unsatisfactory hysteroscopic view than carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82; 5 RCTs, N = 1082; I² = 67%; low-quality evidence). The duration of the procedure was shorter with saline in three of the four studies that reported this outcome, and duration was similar in both arms in the fourth study. Warm saline versus room temperature saline Use of warm saline for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy may reduce pain scores when compared with room temperature saline (mean difference (MD) -1.14, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.73; 3 RCTs, N = 241; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to show differences between groups in either the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.87; 1 RCT, N = 77; very low-quality evidence) or the need for analgesia (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.32; 1 RCT, N = 100; very low-quality evidence). Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in duration of the procedure between warm and room temperature saline, but the quality of evidence is low (MD 13.17 seconds, 95% CI -12.96 to 39.29; 2 RCTs, N = 141; I² = 21%). No cases of infection were reported in either group (1 RCT, N = 100). No other adverse events and no information on quality of the hysteroscopic view were reported by any study in this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to show differences between different distension media used for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy in terms of patient tolerability, operator satisfaction, or duration of the procedure. However, saline was superior to carbon dioxide in producing fewer adverse events (shoulder-tip pain and vasovagal reaction).

Determining the Optimal Time Interval between Vaginal Dinoprostone Administration and Diagnostic Office Hysteroscopy in Nulliparous Women: A Randomized, Double-blind Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal timing of vaginal dinoprostone administration before office hysteroscopy (OH) in nulliparous women.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind trial.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 180 nulliparous women undergoing diagnostic OH.

INTERVENTIONS

We randomly allocated the women to long-interval or short-interval dinoprostone groups: three mg dinoprostone was administered vaginally 12 hours before OH in the long-interval group and 3 hours before OH in the short-interval group.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was pain during OH measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale (0 = no pain; 100 = worst pain imaginable). The secondary outcomes were ease of hysteroscope passage, patient satisfaction score, and drug-related adverse effects. The patients in the long-interval dinoprostone group had lower pain scores during OH (p <.001). Contrarily, pain scores 30 minutes after the procedure were similar in both groups (p = .1). The patient satisfaction score was higher and clinicians found hysteroscope passage through the cervical canal easier and quicker in the long-interval dinoprostone group than in the short-interval group (p <.001, p = .003, and p <.001, respectively). Side effects were comparable in both study groups.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal dinoprostone administered 12 hours before OH was more effective than that administered 3 hours before OH in reducing pain during OH in nulliparous women, with easier hysteroscope insertion, shorter procedure duration, and higher patient satisfaction score.

Systematic review of the safety and efficacy of tramadol during office hysteroscopy

Office hysteroscopy (OH) is a common procedure in gynecology. Pain is the most frequently reported problem in OH. In this study, we aimed to investigate the role of tramadol administration in relieving pain in women undergoing OH. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant clinical trials based on our search terms. We included randomized controlled trials and included all published trials in all six searched databases from their inception until February 28th 2021. We included pain as the primary outcome, and the incidence of adverse events of tramadol as secondary outcomes. We performed the analysis of continuous data using mean difference (MD) and dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR). We found that tramadol led to significantly less pain during the actual procedure [MD=-1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): (-1.66, -0.88); p<0.001], immediately after the procedure [MD=-1.03, 95% CI: (-1.40, -0.67); p<0.001], and 30 minutes after the procedure [MD=-0.74, 95% CI: (-1.06, -0.41); p<0.001]. Regarding safety endpoints, no significant difference was noted for dizziness [RR=1.88, 95% CI: (0.79, 4.47); p=0.16] or vomiting [RR=1.80, 95% CI: (0.40, 8.18); p=0.45]. Based on the available data, we conclude that tramadol administration seems to be both effective and safe for patients undergoing office hysteroscopy.

Pain and anxiety in office histeroscopy

BACKGROUND

Anxiety is almost always present before medical interventions and may play a role in pain perception. We aim to evaluate factors associated with pain intensity reported by patients submitted to Office Hysteroscopy (OH).

METHODS

Cross-sectional observational study, with data from April to November 2015. It included patients attended at the Assis Chateaubriand Maternity School (MEAC/UFC) with an indication of office hysteroscopy. Before the examination, the patients answered a validated questionnaire about anxiety (STAI). After the examination, women answered the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 15.0, with Spearman correlation, Mann-Whitney U-test, and analyses of variance.

RESULTS

252 patients were included, with a mean age of 45.7 years, of whom 29% were postmenopausal (mean pain 5.5) and 71% were in menacme (mean pain 5.1) (p = 0.258). The anxiety trait and state showed a significant influence on the pain scale (p <0.001 and p=0.001), but age or endometrial sample did not. 27% of the patients were nulliparous. Less pain was associated with the number (p=0.01) and vaginal (p=0.005) of deliveries. The main indication for the procedure was abnormal uterine bleeding (54.4%).

CONCLUSION

OH may be associated with moderate but tolerable discomfort. There was a significant correlation between higher scores on the pain scale and anxiety. There was evidence of reduced pain with parity and type of delivery, but not with reproductive age or endometrial biopsy.

Impact of anxiety levels on the perception of pain in patients undergoing office hysteroscopy

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed at assessing the impact of anxiety on pain perception during hysteroscopy and to highlight the possible contribution of factors related to pain perception.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

104 women with indication for office hysteroscopy fullfilled anonymous self-report questionnaires during the waiting time, before the procedure. The first self-report questionnaire included general patient information and an overall assessment of the degree of satisfaction with the information received before the procedure. The level of pre-procedural anxiety was measured through the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory STAI-Y1 (state anxiety). The perceived stress was assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). The intensity of pain during the procedure and 20 min later was assessed with VAS score.

RESULTS

The average waiting time was of 192.33 ± 91 min. 59 patients (56.7%) performed the examination without analgesia while 45 women (43.3%) required analgesia. 28 women (27%) experienced mild pain, 34 (33%) moderate pain and 42 (40%) severe pain. The patients who performed the procedure without analgosedation had an average STAI-Y1 score of 44.81 ± 1.20, compared to women who required analgosedation (average score of 49.40 ± 1.64). The perceived level of stress was also associated with the use of analgosedation. Patients who did not request any anesthetic intervention obtained a PSS average score of 16.66 ± 0.75, compared to the subgroup with anesthesia (score of 19.76 ± 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Anxiety represents a key element for the success of ambulatory hysteroscopy. The management of anxiety can reduce the request for analgesia with a consequent optimization of time, costs and safety.

Electronic Continuous Pain Measurement vs Verbal Rating Scale in gynaecology: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare pain measured with a new electronic device - the Continuous Pain Score Meter (CPSM) - and the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) during gynaecological procedures in an outpatient setting, and to correlate these outcomes with baseline anxiety and patient (in)tolerance to the procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective cohort study was undertaken in two centres: a university hospital and a large teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Patients undergoing an outpatient hysteroscopy, colposcopy or ovum pick-up procedure for in-vitro fertilization in one of the two participating hospitals with availability of the CPSM were included. Pain was measured by both the CPSM and the VRS. Patient tolerance to the procedure was reported. Various outcomes of the CPSM were compared with those of the VRS and related to baseline anxiety scores.

RESULTS

Ninety-one of 108 included patients (84 %) used the CPSM correctly during the procedure, and it was possible to analyse the CPSM scores for 87 women (81 %). The CPSM scores were all linearly related to the VRS. The peak pain score on the CPSM (CPSM-PPS) had the strongest correlation with the VRS score for all three procedures. Higher CPSM-PPS was related to patient (in)tolerance to the procedure (p = 0.03-0.002). Anxiety at baseline was not correlated with pain perception, except for VRS during colposcopy (r = 0.39, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients were able to use the CPSM correctly, resulting in detailed information on pain perception for each individual pain stimulus during three outpatient gynaecological procedures. The CPSM-PPS had the strongest correlation with the VRS score and patient (in)tolerance to the procedure.

Is every patient eligible to have an office hysteroscopy? A retrospective analysis of 1301 procedures

Introduction

Hysteroscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of uterine pathologies. The office setting seems to be safe, reducing the anesthesia risks and also decreasing the overall costs of the procedure. Recent literature suggests that hysteroscopy performed without anesthesia may not be as painless as it was previously considered. Moreover, not every patient can be referred for a hysteroscopy in an office setting.

Aim

To analyze the factors correlated with a successful hysteroscopy in an office setting.

Material and methods

We analyzed the documentation of 1301 patients who underwent hysteroscopy at our department in the period 2013-2016. The impact of the type of the procedure and the various demographic factors on the need for general anesthesia was assessed.

Results

Almost 80% of all hysteroscopies were performed without analgesia in an office setting. The remaining patients underwent a hysteroscopy in general anesthesia. The key aspect for successful office hysteroscopy is the scope of the performed surgery. Over 91% of diagnostic hysteroscopies have been done without analgesia, but only about 30% of extensive endometrial scratching procedures were performed in an office setting. A previous vaginal delivery increases the chances for a successful office hysteroscopy by about 21%, and in the case of diagnostic procedures, multiparous patients were at an about 79% lower risk of analgesia necessity.

Conclusions

It is possible to perform nearly all diagnostic hysteroscopies in an office setting. In the case of operative hysteroscopy, the most crucial factor is the scope of the procedure.

Diagnostic office hysteroscopy with the Storz TrophyScope® versus Cooper surgical Endosee®

BACKGROUND

Office hysteroscopy (OH) is becoming increasingly popular. Our objective was to determine the use patterns, reported pain scores, and success rates of OH with the 2.9 mm Storz TrophyScope^® and handheld portable Cooper surgical Endosee^® device in a clinic without previous office hysteroscopy experience.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of a hysteroscopy quality improvement database was conducted in a tertiary care center gynecology clinic. Patients undergoing OH with either the Storz TrophyScope^® or Cooper Surgical Endosee^® device were included.

RESULTS

Of the 171 office hysteroscopies, 77 utilized the TrophyScope^®, with 8 (10%) being inadequate, while 94 utilized Endosee^®, with 13 (14%) being inadequate (P=0.50). Of the 13 inadequate Endosee^® hysteroscopies, 4 (31%) were due to visualization, 4 (31%) to patient intolerance, 3 (23%) to cervical stenosis, and 2 (15%) to a combination of these factors. Of the 8 inadequate TrophyScope^® hysteroscopies, 7 (87%) were due to patient intolerance and 1 (13%) to cervical stenosis. Of the 150 adequate office procedures performed, 52 cases underwent subsequent procedures in the operating room (OR). Of these, 26 (84%) of 31 Endosee^® cases and 18 (86%) of 21 TrophyScope^® cases were in agreement with OR procedure findings. A subgroup analysis comparing mean pain levels did not significantly differ between the two hysteroscopes.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in accuracy with OR pathologic diagnoses, adequacy of procedure, and reported pain scores when comparing the TrophyScope® and Endosee® in this prospective cohort. Larger studies are needed to confirm the sensitivity, and specificity for these newer, disposable office hysteroscopic devices.

Does temperature of distending medium matter in outpatient hysteroscopy? A double-blinded cohort control observational study of room temperature versus warmed saline

AIM

There is little data assessing outcomes of outpatient hysteroscopy using warmed versus room temperature saline. The aim of this study was to determine if the temperature of the distending medium during outpatient hysteroscopy affect ease of procedure, clarity of view, procedural discomfort/pain and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

This was a double-blinded cohort control quasi-randomized prospective study involving 100 women undergoing outpatient diagnostic and operative hysteroscopy for abnormal uterine bleeding, intrauterine contraceptive devices retrieval and removal of endometrial polyps. Outpatient hysteroscopy was performed either with normal saline either at room temperature (control at 25°C) or warmed to body temperature (37°C).

RESULTS

Confounding variables such as age, parity, previous cervical surgery, previous vaginal births, menopausal status and indications for hysteroscopy were similar in the room temperature (n = 48) and warmed saline (n = 52) groups. Mean procedure duration (256 vs 233 s), ease of entry (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] 9.55 vs 9.4) and the clarity of view (VAS 9.02 vs 9.3) were statistically similar in both groups (all P > 0.05) as was discomfort experienced during hysteroscopy (VAS 6.6/10 vs 6.8/10) and at 5 min post-procedure (VAS 4.2/10 vs 3.2/10) (both P > 0.05). The likelihood of recommending the procedure to a friend was similar in both groups (mean VAS 6.9/10 vs 7.2/10; P = 0.1).

CONCLUSION

The temperature of the distension medium did not influence ease of procedure, clarity of hysteroscopy view, procedural discomfort/pain and patient satisfaction. Patients were not any more likely to recommend the procedure to a friend in the warmed saline compared to the room temperature group.

Prevalence and intensity of pain during diagnostic hysteroscopy in women attending an infertility clinic: analysis of 489 cases

Objective

To investigate the prevalence and intensity of pain perception during diagnostic hysteroscopy in women and potential related factors.

Methods

A total of 489 women were investigated at an infertility clinic. Fluid diagnostic hysteroscopy was performed without analgesia or anesthesia by gynecologists with different levels of experience in operative hysteroscopy, using a 2.9mm rigid scope. The Visual Analog Scale was used to score pain intensity after vaginal speculum insertion and after hysteroscopy. Data collected included age, ethnicity, body mass index, history of infertility and endometrial surgery (curettage and/or hysteroscopy), smoking habits, and hysteroscopy diagnosis. Only the state of anxiety was assessed by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory given to each patient before the procedure.

Results

Hysteroscopy median (25^th to 75^th) Visual Analog Scale scored 3.3 (3 to 5), and 41.7% of the women referred Visual Analog Scale score ≥4. Median (25^th to 75^th) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score was 42 (38 to 45), and 58.3% of the women referred State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score >40. Hysteroscopy Visual Analog Scale score was significantly correlated to surgeon experience and to vaginal speculum insertion but not to State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score, ethnicity or abnormal hysteroscopic findings.

Conclusion

Diagnostic hysteroscopy was mostly perceived as a mild discomfort procedure by most women. Nevertheless, in a considerable number of cases, women perceived hysteroscopy as painful. Pain perception was linked to individual pain threshold and surgeon experience, but not to pre-procedural anxiety state levels, ethnicity or abnormal hysteroscopic findings.

Failed diagnostic hysteroscopy: Analysis of 62 cases

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the presented study is to improve the office hysteroscopy success rate identifying some of the factors associated to an unsuccessful procedure. Moreover it would highlight the importance of an adequate patients follow up after office hysteroscopy failure enlightening the uterine pathologies missed at the first attempt.

STUDYDESIGN

This is a retrospective observational study. The Authors reviewed the medical records related to 516 office hysteroscopies performed from January 2016 to November 2018, extrapolating the data from the failed hysteroscopies occurred during this period. After the procedure failure all patients were offered to repeat the hysteroscopy under regional anesthesia in order to identify and treat uterine pathologies. Those patients, who declined to repeat the procedure, received an appropriate follow up. Each failure case is correlated with patient clinical characteristics, indications to hysteroscopy, risk factors presence, hysteroscopy patient compliance, pathology result and patient follow up.

RESULTS

The presented study shows an office hysteroscopy failure rate of about 12 %. Severe pain due to cervical stenosis, previous uterine surgery, postmenopausal status and marked uterine ventrifixation/retroflexion, represent the main reason why the procedure was not completed in an office setting. The uterine cavity was subsequently examined in only 26 (42 %) out of 62 patients who reported hysteroscopy failure, mostly repeating the procedure under regional anesthesia (24 cases) or performing vaginal hysterectomy for associated benign gynaecological pathology (2 cases). Endometrial malign pathology (endometrioid carcinoma) was diagnosed in 2 cases of them (7.7 %). Moreover the endometrial cavity remained so far unexplored in 36 (58 %) out of 62 patients, due to the patient refuse to repeat the hysteroscopy under anesthesia.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Results of the present study suggest that office hysteroscopy should be sussessful at the first attempt due to the patients' refuse, in majority of cases, to repeat the procedure after a failure. To not repeat the hysteroscopy may lead to lose or delay important diagnosis, such as that of endometrial cancer. In this context, to counsel all patients prior the procedure may singnificanly help to identify those who may benefit of pharmacological cervical softening, local anesthetic injection or small caliber hysteroscopes usage, increasing the procedure success rate.

Hysteroscopy for treating subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest higher pregnancy rates after the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions, which are present in 10% to 15% of women seeking treatment for subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions suspected on ultrasound, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or prior to intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from their inception to 16 April 2018; The Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, ; MEDLINE, Embase , CINAHL , and other electronic sources of trials including trial registers, sources of unpublished literature, and reference lists. We handsearched the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference abstracts and proceedings (from 1 January 2014 to 12 May 2018) and we contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for unexplained subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities.Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities prior to medically assisted reproduction.Primary outcomes were live birth and hysteroscopy complications. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy and miscarriage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies met the inclusion criteria.1. Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for unexplained subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities.In women with otherwise unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids, we were uncertain whether hysteroscopic myomectomy improved the clinical pregnancy rate compared to expectant management (odds ratio (OR) 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 6.17; P = 0.06, 94 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether hysteroscopic myomectomy improves the miscarriage rate compared to expectant management (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.00; P = 0.47, 94 women; very low-quality evidence). We found no data on live birth or hysteroscopy complication rates. We found no studies in women with endometrial polyps, intrauterine adhesions or uterine septum for this randomised comparison.2. Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities prior to medically assisted reproduction.The hysteroscopic removal of polyps prior to IUI may have improved the clinical pregnancy rate compared to diagnostic hysteroscopy only: if 28% of women achieved a clinical pregnancy without polyp removal, the evidence suggested that 63% of women (95% CI 45% to 89%) achieved a clinical pregnancy after the hysteroscopic removal of the endometrial polyps (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.45 to 7.96; P < 0.00001, 204 women; low-quality evidence). We found no data on live birth, hysteroscopy complication or miscarriage rates in women with endometrial polyps prior to IUI. We found no studies in women with submucous fibroids, intrauterine adhesions or uterine septum prior to IUI or in women with all types of suspected uterine cavity abnormalities prior to IVF/ICSI.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Uncertainty remains concerning an important benefit with the hysteroscopic removal of submucous fibroids for improving the clinical pregnancy rates in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility. The available low-quality evidence suggests that the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps suspected on ultrasound in women prior to IUI may improve the clinical pregnancy rate compared to simple diagnostic hysteroscopy. More research is needed to measure the effectiveness of the hysteroscopic treatment of suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities in women with unexplained subfertility or prior to IUI, IVF or ICSI.

The effect of music in gynaecological office procedures on pain, anxiety and satisfaction: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Pain can interfere with office procedures in gynaecology. The aim of this study is to measure the positive effect of music in gynaecological office procedures.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial was performed between October 2014 and January 2016. Women scheduled for an office hysteroscopy or colposcopy were eligible for randomization in the music group or control group. Stratification for hysteroscopy and colposcopy took place. The primary outcome is patients’ level of pain during the procedure measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include patients’ level of pain after the procedure, anxiety and satisfaction of patient and doctor.

Results

No positive effect of music on patients’ perception of pain during the procedure was measured, neither for the hysteroscopy group (57 mm vs. 52 mm) nor for the colposcopy group (32 mm vs. 32 mm). Secondary outcomes were also similar for both groups.

Conclusions

This study showed no positive effect of music on patients’ level of pain, anxiety or satisfaction of patient or doctor for office hysteroscopy and colposcopy. We believe a multimodal approach has to be used to decrease patient distress in terms of pain and anxiety, with or without music.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register, NTR4924

Impact of Uterine Scar on Pain Experienced During Outpatient Hysteroscopy: A Prospective Blinded Comparative Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To study the impact of uterine scar on pain experienced during outpatient hysteroscopy.

DESIGN

A prospective blinded comparative study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1).

SETTING

Outpatient hysteroscopy clinic at a university hospital.

PATIENTS

We included 140 women in the childbearing period attending an outpatient hysteroscopy clinic. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A included patients with previous uterine scar (n = 70) and Group B included those with unscarred uterus (n = 70). None of the patients had a previous attempt of a vaginal delivery.

INTERVENTION

Diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy without the use of anesthesia or analgesia.

MEASUREMENTS

We assessed pain experienced during and immediately after the procedure using a 100-mm visual analog scale. We also evaluated the successful completion of the procedure.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the pain scores between patients with scarred uterus and those with unscarred uterus during or immediately after the procedure. The procedure was aborted in only 1 case in the scarred uterus group. This patient had a history of surgical site infection, which may denote a weak scar. There were no statistically significant differences in pain scores between patients with cesarean scar and those with myomectomy scar. No statistically significant differences in pain scores were found between patients with 1, 2, 3, or 4 cesarean deliveries.

CONCLUSION

Uncomplicated uterine scars do not have an impact on pain experienced during or immediately after diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy using a 3.8-mm hysteroscope.

Role of oral tramadol 50 mg in reducing pain associated with outpatient hysteroscopy: A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Several drugs have been used to reduce hysteroscopy-associated pain. Although the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has recommended against the use of opiates in outpatient hysteroscopy, we wished to investigate if opioids can be used if the appropriate opioid was given in the appropriate dose.

AIM

To study the effectiveness of tramadol 50 mg in reducing pain associated with outpatient hysteroscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial conducted in the outpatient hysteroscopy clinic at Cairo University Hospital. Main outcome measures were the severity of pain during the procedure, immediately after the procedure and 30 minutes later assessed by a visual analogue scale (VAS). VAS of 0 indicates no pain and VAS of 10 indicates the worst possible pain.

RESULTS

A total of 140 women who had diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy were randomised to receive oral tramadol 50 mg or placebo one h before performing outpatient hysteroscopy. There was no difference between the groups in the age, parity, duration of the procedures or indications of hysteroscopy. The median pain score was significantly lower in the tramadol group during the procedure (5 vs 6; P = 0.013), immediately after the procedure (3 vs 4; P < 0.036), and 30 minute later (1 vs 2; P = 0.034). Two women in the tramadol group reported nausea, but this was mild and did not warrant cancelling the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral administration of tramadol 50 mg before hysteroscopy reduces the pain evoked by the procedure and the drug was well tolerated by women.

Setting up of ambulatory hysteroscopy service

There is an obvious trend towards developing ambulatory procedures in gynaecology with ambulatory hysteroscopy as its mainstay. In the recent years, the fast pace of modern technological advances in gynaecologic endoscopy, and particularly in the field of hysteroscopy, have been both thrilling and spectacular. Despite this, the uptake of operative hysteroscopy in ambulatory settings has been relatively slow. There is some apprehension amongst gynaecologists to embark on therapeutic outpatient hysteroscopy, and an organisational change is required to alter the mindset. Although there are best practice guidelines for outpatient hysteroscopy, there are unresolved issues around adequate training and accreditation of future hysteroscopists. Virtual-reality simulation training for operative hysteroscopy has shown promising preliminary results, and it is being aggressively evaluated and validated. This review article is an attempt to provide a useful practical guide to all those who wish to implement ambulatory hysteroscopy services in their outpatient departments.

Anxiety at outpatient hysteroscopy

This review summarises current understanding and research on the association between anxiety and outpatient hysteroscopy. Women undergoing hysteroscopy suffer from significant levels of anxiety, with repercussions on pain perception, success rates and satisfaction. Using validated tools such as the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Index (STAI) or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in the outpatient hysteroscopy setting, average state anxiety scores similar or greater than those measured before more invasive procedures under general anaesthesia have been consistently reported. This clearly suggests a significant gap between our clinical viewpoint of what is "minimally invasive" and patients' expectations. In spite of its potential role of confounder in studies on pain-reduction interventions, we found that patient anxiety was evaluated in only 9 (13 %) out of a sample of 70 randomised controlled trials on outpatient hysteroscopy published since 1992. Factors such as trait anxiety, age, indication and the efficiency of the clinic can be correlated to state anxiety before hysteroscopy, but more robust data are needed. Promising non-pharmacological interventions to reduce anxiety at hysteroscopy include patient education, communication through traditional or multimedia approaches, interaction and support during the procedure and music listening.

Hysteroscopy for treating subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest higher pregnancy rates after the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions, which are detectable in 10% to 15% of women seeking treatment for subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions suspected on ultrasound, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or prior to intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Specialised Register (8 September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1950 to 12 October 2014), EMBASE (inception to 12 October 2014), CINAHL (inception to 11 October 2014) and other electronic sources of trials including trial registers, sources of unpublished literature and reference lists. We handsearched the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference abstracts and proceedings (from January 2013 to October 2014) and we contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised comparisons between operative hysteroscopy versus control in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or undergoing IUI, IVF or ICSI and suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by ultrasonography, saline infusion/gel instillation sonography, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods. Primary outcomes were live birth and hysteroscopy complications. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy and miscarriage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved 12 randomised trials possibly addressing the research questions. Only two studies (309 women) met the inclusion criteria. Neither reported the primary outcomes of live birth or procedure related complications. In women with otherwise unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids there was no conclusive evidence of a difference between the intervention group treated with hysteroscopic myomectomy and the control group having regular fertility-oriented intercourse during 12 months for the outcome of clinical pregnancy. A large clinical benefit with hysteroscopic myomectomy cannot be excluded: if 21% of women with fibroids achieve a clinical pregnancy having timed intercourse only, the evidence suggests that 39% of women (95% CI 21% to 58%) will achieve a successful outcome following the hysteroscopic removal of the fibroids (odds ratio (OR) 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 6.17, P = 0.06, 94 women, very low quality evidence). There is no evidence of a difference between the comparison groups for the outcome of miscarriage (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.85, P = 0.50, 30 clinical pregnancies in 94 women, very low quality evidence). The hysteroscopic removal of polyps prior to IUI can increase the chance of a clinical pregnancy compared to simple diagnostic hysteroscopy and polyp biopsy: if 28% of women achieve a clinical pregnancy with a simple diagnostic hysteroscopy, the evidence suggests that 63% of women (95% CI 50% to 76%) will achieve a clinical pregnancy after the hysteroscopic removal of the endometrial polyps (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.45 to 7.96, P < 0.00001, 204 women, moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A large benefit with the hysteroscopic removal of submucous fibroids for improving the chance of clinical pregnancy in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility cannot be excluded. The hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps suspected on ultrasound in women prior to IUI may increase the clinical pregnancy rate. More randomised studies are needed to substantiate the effectiveness of the hysteroscopic removal of suspected endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions in women with unexplained subfertility or prior to IUI, IVF or ICSI.

The potential role of endometrial nerve fibers in the pathogenesis of pain during endometrial biopsy at office hysteroscopy

We aimed to evaluate whether nerve fibers are present in the endometrial layer of patients submitted to office hysteroscopy and their potential contribution to the pathogenesis of pain during that procedure. Through a prospective case-control study performed in tertiary centers for women's health, endometrium samples were collected during operative office hysteroscopy from 198 cycling women who previously underwent laparoscopy and/or magnetic resonance imaging investigation for infertility assessment. Samples were classified according to the degree of the pain patients experienced and scored from values ranging from 0 (absence of discomfort/pain) to 10 (intolerable pain) on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). The presence of nerve fiber markers (S100, NSE, SP, VIP, NPY, NKA, NKB, NKR1, NKR2, and NKR3) in the endometrium was also evaluated by morphologic and immunohistochemical analyses. We found that S-100, NSE, NKR1, NK-A, NK-B, VIP, and NPY, were immunolocalized in samples of endometrium, in significantly (P < .01, for all) higher levels in samples collected from patients with VAS score > 5 (group A) than ≤ 5 (group B) and significantly (P < .0001 for all) positively correlated with VAS levels. A statistically significant (P = .018) higher prevalence of endometriosis and/or adenomyosis was depicted in patients of group A than group B. Data from the present study led us to conclude that nerve fibers are expressed at the level of the functional layer of the endometrium and may contribute to pain generation during office hysteroscopy, mainly in women affected by endometriosis and adenomyosis.

Hysteroscopy: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians

The objective of this study was to provide guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CNGOF), based on the best evidence available, concerning hysteroscopy. Vaginoscopy should be the standard technique for diagnostic hysteroscopy (Grade A) using a miniature (≤3.5mm sheath) (Grade A) rigid hysteroscope (Grade C), using normal saline solution distension medium (Grade C), without any anaesthesia (conscious sedation should not be routinely used), without cervical preparation (Grade B), without vaginal disinfection and without antibiotic prophylaxy (Grade B). Misoprostol (Grade A), vaginal oestrogens (Grade C), or GnRH agonist routine administration is not recommended before operative hysteroscopy. Before performing hysteroscopy, it is important to purge the air out of the system (Grade A). The uterine cavity distention pressure should be maintained below the mean arterial pressure and below 120mm Hg. The maximum fluid deficit of 2000ml is suggested when using normal saline solution and 1000ml is suggested when using hypotonic solution. When uterine perforation is recognized during operative hysteroscopy using monopolar or bipolar loop, the procedure should be stopped and a laparoscopy should be performed in order to eliminate a bowel injury. Diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy is allowed when an endometrial cancer is suspected (Grade B). Implementation of this guideline should decrease the prevalence of complications related to hysteroscopy.

[Comparison of fertiloscopy versus laparoscopy in the exploration of the infertility: analysis of the literature]

BACKGROUND

Fertiloscopy is a recent technique designed to explore the tubo-ovarian axis in unexplained infertility. It is a simple outpatient technique, allowing to perform operative procedures, but its position relative to laparoscopy is yet to be defined.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A thorough and extensive bibliographical search was undertaken to fully embrace the question, challenging Medline at the National Library of Medicine, Cochrane Library, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Health Technology Assessment Database. All the retrieved articles were classified as either descriptive or comparative studies and evaluated on a set of criteria.

RESULTS

Most of the papers described case series coming from a few teams, focusing mainly on the technical aspect of the procedure, like the access rate to the posterior cul-de-sac, the success rate in visualizing the pelvis, the complications rate (mainly rectal perforation), and its operative performance in drilling ovaries for resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome. Comparative studies numbered six trials. They all followed the same design, fertiloscopy preceding conventional laparoscopy in patients taken as their own control. The concordance rate between the two modalities reaches 80% in terms of tubal pathology, adherences and endometriosis, with an estimated reduction of laparoscopies varying from 40% to 93%.

CONCLUSION

The current literature shows a concordance between fertiloscopy and conventional laparoscopic findings for certain parameters in cases of tubal pathology, adherences and endometriosis. The relative positions of these two modalities in unexplained infertility still remain elusive.

[Prevention of the complications related to hysteroscopy: guidelines for clinical practice]

OBJECTIVE

To provide clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) from the French college of obstetrics and gynecology (CNGOF), based on the best evidence available, concerning the adverse events related to hysteroscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of literature using following Keywords: hysteroscopy; vaginoscopy; infection; perforation; intrauterine adhesions

RESULTS

Vaginoscopy should be the standard technique for outpatient hysteroscopy (grade A) using a miniature (≤ 3.5mm sheath) (grade A) rigid hysteroscope (grade C), using normal saline solution distension medium (grade C), without any anesthesia (conscious sedation should not be routinely used), without cervical preparation (grade B), without vaginal disinfection and without antibiotic prophylaxy (grade B). Misoprostol (grade A), vaginal estrogens (grade C), or GnRH agonist routine administration is not recommended before operative hysteroscopy. Before performing hysteroscopy, it is important to purge the air out of the system (grade A). The uterine cavity distention pressure should be maintained below the mean arterial pressure and below 120 mmHg. The maximum fluid deficit of 2000 mL is suggested when using normal saline solution and 1000 mL is suggested when using hypotonic solution. When uterine perforation is recognized during operative hysteroscopy using monopolar or bipolar loop, the procedure should be stopped and a laparoscopy should be performed in order to eliminate a bowel injury. Diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy is allowed when an endometrial cancer is suspected (grade B).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of this guideline should decrease the prevalence of complications related to office and operative hysteroscopy.

Hysteroscopy for treating subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest higher pregnancy rates after the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions, which are detectable in 10% to 15% of women seeking treatment for subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions suspected on ultrasound, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or prior to intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Specialised Register (6 August 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (T he Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2012), EMBASE (1974 to October 2012), CINAHL (from inception to October 2012) and other electronic sources of trials including trial registers, sources of unpublished literature and reference lists. We handsearched the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference abstracts and proceedings (from January 2008 to October 2012) and we contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised comparisons between operative hysteroscopy versus control in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or undergoing IUI, IVF or ICSI and suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by ultrasonography, saline infusion/gel instillation sonography, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods. Primary outcomes were live birth and hysteroscopy complications. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy and miscarriage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies met the inclusion criteria and neither reported the primary outcomes of live birth and complications from the procedure. In women with otherwise unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids, there is no evidence of benefit with hysteroscopic myomectomy compared to regular fertility-oriented intercourse during 12 months for clinical pregnancy (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 6.2, P = 0.06, 94 women) and miscarriage (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.0, P = 0.47, 94 women) (very low-quality evidence). The hysteroscopic removal of polyps prior to IUI increases the odds of clinical pregnancy (experimental event rate (EER) 63%) compared to diagnostic hysteroscopy and polyp biopsy only (control event rate (CER) 28%) (OR 4.4, 95% CI 2.5 to 8.0, P < 0.00001, 204 women, high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hysteroscopic myomectomy might increase the odds of clinical pregnancy in women with unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids, but the evidence is at present not conclusive. The hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps suspected on ultrasound in women prior to IUI might increase the clinical pregnancy rate. More randomised studies are needed to substantiate the effectiveness of the hysteroscopic removal of suspected endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions in women with unexplained subfertility or prior to IUI, IVF or ICSI.