Ambulatory hysteroscopy

Pain experience with outpatient hysteroscopy: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) affects women of all ages and is one of the most common reasons for referral to a gynaecological clinic. Operative hysteroscopic procedures allow for a see-and-treat approach to AUB, and these techniques have been shown to be feasible and acceptable in the outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVE

To assess if there is an increase in pain scores for women who are undergoing an operative hysteroscopic procedure with Myosure LITE® (Hologic; mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal system) compared to outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy alone.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study was performed. All participants attending the outpatient hysteroscopy clinic at Mercy Hospital for Women completed a pre-and post-procedure questionnaire. This included a visual analogue scale (VAS) for any pre-existing pain, anticipated pain, and actual pain experienced during procedure. Factors influencing overall satisfaction and willingness to attend again were also assessed. Data was entered into RedCap® for analysis. A difference in VAS of 10 mm or more was considered clinically significant. An alpha of p < 0.05 was assigned for statistical significance.

RESULTS

Between February 2020 and November 2022, 208 women underwent outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy followed by an operative hysteroscopy with MyoSure®. To allow for standardisation of analgesia, only participants who had a cervical block before their Myosure® procedure were included for analysis (n = 111). There was statistical evidence (t(111) = 2.36, p = 0.02) of a lower mean VAS pain score for operative Myosure (36.5 mm, 95 % CI: 31.1-41.8 mm) compared to outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy (44.1 mm, 95 % CI: 39.0-49.2 mm). The mean difference in VAS pain score was estimated as 7.7 mm (95 % CI: 1.2-14.1 mm) lower for Myosure compared to hysteroscopy. Given the threshold for clinical significance was considered as 10 mm difference in VAS, the variance in pain scores is under the likely clinically significant range. There was no significant difference in pain scores for diagnostic hysteroscopy with or without paracervical block (mean difference = 1.42; 95 % CI: -6.35 to 9.20). There was no association between pre-existing pain, and actual pain for hysteroscopy, or Myosure (p = 0.997 and p = 0.065 respectively). The anticipated pain score was weakly associated with actual pain during the operative Myosure procedure (p = 0.02), and with outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy (p = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Outpatient hysteroscopy procedures are generally well tolerated. The pain experience with operative Myosure was less than that reported during the diagnostic hysteroscopy by the same patient although this is unlikely of clinical significance. Importantly, Myosure was not more painful than the initial diagnostic procedure, and most patients were satisfied with the outcome and would choose to have the procedure again in an outpatient setting. This is in keeping with other studies which have shown a high degree of patient tolerance and satisfaction with this approach.

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.

Mini-resectoscope vs morcellator for in-office hysteroscopic myomectomy: Evaluation of results and patient satisfaction

INTRODUCTION

The development of hysteroscopic techniques has led to an advance in submucous myoma treatment, offering a safe and effective minimally invasive alternative. Our objective was to compare the results of hysteroscopic myomectomy when using whether the mini-resectoscope or the MyoSure morcellator, as well as patient satisfaction after the procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective, cross-sectional, observational study including 80 patients distributed into two groups: Mini-Resectoscope group (MRG) or MyoSure group (MSG), depending on the instrument used for the in-office hysteroscopic myomectomy. Resection time, pain during entry, pain during resection, number of resections required, complete resection, and total satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

MSG had statistically significant shorter time of entrance. There were no other statistically significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In-office hysteroscopic myomectomy is associated with high levels of patient satisfaction, without differences between the mini-resectoscope or the MyoSure, allowing high rates of complete resection using both instruments. Thus, it is a feasible technique which could be performed with both instruments, depending on the operator's expertise.

Re-intervention and patient satisfaction rates following office radiofrequency endometrial ablation: a comparative retrospective study of 408 cases

This retrospective study assessed the efficacy and long-term satisfaction of radiofrequency endometrial ablation outside the context of clinical trials in 408 women, and compared the outcome between office-setting (211, 52%) and day-case procedures under general anaesthetics (197, 48%). The Kaplan Meir time-to-event analysis showed that the cumulative number of women undergoing surgical re-intervention was 32 with a probability of 9.4% (95% CI: 6.3 - 12.5%) at 2-years, and 45 with a probability of 14.5% (95% CI: 10.3 - 18.2%) at 5-years. There was no statistically significant difference in the re-intervention rate between office and day-case groups (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.68 - 3.1, p = .3). The satisfaction rate, measured by Visual Analogue Scale, was not statistically different (p = .5) between office (109; 80.7%) and day-case (96; 82.8%) groups. This study showed lower surgical re-intervention rate than previously reported in observational studies, and high rates of long-term women satisfaction. The outcomes were similar in office and day-case settings.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Previous studies have shown the safety and effectiveness of radiofrequency endometrial ablation for treating heavy periods. However, studies investigating it, outside clinical trials, either included a small sample size, a short-term follow-up, poor reporting so that it is impossible to judge whether some women underwent re-intervention in another centre, failed to discriminate in analysis between second-generation techniques, or assessed only short-term satisfaction.What do the results of this study add? This is the largest series reported from a single centre and the first study reporting long-term satisfaction in women, outside clinical trials. Surgical re-intervention was used as the primary outcome measure which is an objective measure rather than the change in the monthly flow which is rather subjective. More importantly, the study records the similarity, in the outcome and women's satisfaction rate, between office and day-case procedures under general anaesthetics.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Endometrial ablation service is widely implemented in office-setting in the UK. We hope the result of this study encourages implementation on a larger scale in office across centres in the world with its multiple advantages both to women and service alike.

Office hysteroscopic morcellation service: Evaluation of women experience and factors affecting satisfaction

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the hysteroscopic morcellation service in office-setting in everyday practice outside the context of clinical trials. The primary objectives were to assess level of acceptability and factors affecting women satisfaction. The secondary objectives included assessment of complete resection rate, complications rate, pain score during the procedure and on discharge, and the correlation between the lesion size as subjectively estimated by the hysteroscopists versus the volume of morcellated tissues as semi-quantitively measured by the laboratory.

METHOD

The clinical data was compiled for 287 consecutive women undergoing hysteroscopic morcellation in office-setting from 1 January 2017 to 31 March 2021 in a teaching hospital in the UK. A questionnaire, formulated on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), was completed immediately after the procedure by the last 110 women undergoing the procedure.

RESULTS

The mean age of the cohort (n = 278) was 54.5 years (SD ± 12.5). Only 7 (2.4%) women required two-stage procedure because of size (fibroid ≥ 4 cm), vascularity or multiplicity of lesions. No complications were encountered. The majority of women completing the questionnaire (n = 110) found office procedure acceptable (105, 95.5%, VAS ≥ 7), were willing to have it again if indicated (102, 92.7%, VAS ≥ 7), would recommend it to family and friends (105, 95.5%, VAS ≥ 7) and confirmed receiving adequate preoperative information by doctors and nurses (107, 97.3%, VAS ≥ 7). The level of preoperative explanation and information-giving showed significant (p < 0.01) positive correlation with the level of acceptability and recommendation to others and significant (p = .007) negative correlation with the pain experienced on discharge. The median (IQR) estimated size at hysteroscopy was 2 cm (1-6 cm) for polyps and 2.5 cm (1-4 cm) for fibroid. The median (IQR) volume of the morcellated specimens as estimated by laboratory was 2000 mm³ (1100-3800 mm³). The estimated size at hysteroscopy was positively correlated with the specimen's volume (Spearman's rho (r) = 0.31, 95% = CI, 0.14-0.45, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Office hysteroscopic morcellation is associated with high satisfaction rate and low pain score on discharge. Good preoperative explanation and information-giving was the crucial factor that increased women satisfaction. Subjective estimation of lesion size by hysteroscopists may be an accurate and simple method of measurement.

Increasing the adoption of ambulatory hysteroscopy in Australia - cost comparisons and patient satisfaction

We present the findings of a prospective cohort study in a single tertiary hospital to review the patient experience and economic benefit of ambulatory hysteroscopy (AH). Data were collected between May 2017 and February 2020. Patient satisfaction was measured with qualitative survey. Hospital level financial data were obtained over two financial years (2017/18 and 2018/19) to identify seasonal variation. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction and the secondary outcome was cost of AH compared to hysteroscopy under GA. Three hundred and twenty-nine patients underwent AH. Two hundred and ninety-eight responses (91%) were collected. Ninety-five percent of procedures were successful. Median pain score was five out of 10. Despite pain, 94% of patients would undergo AH again and 97% would recommend it. The average hospital cost for AH was $259 compared with $3098 for hysteroscopy under GA. These findings support AH as a safe, well-tolerated and economically viable alternative to hysteroscopy under GA.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Hysteroscopy is traditionally performed in an operating theatre under general anaesthesia (GA). Technological advancements allow for the procedure to be performed in an outpatient setting. Despite advantages of ambulatory hysteroscopy (AH), GA hysteroscopy is still the predominant intervention in Australia.What the results of this study add? Patient satisfaction in AH was assessed. The median pain score was five out of 10. Despite pain, 94% of patients would undergo AH again and 97% would recommend it.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? AH is a well-tolerated alternative to hysteroscopy under GA with significant cost benefits to the hospital and high patient satisfaction. Further research should focus on direct comparison of the two procedure approaches using randomised controlled trials.

A Prospective Multicenter Registry of Patients Undergoing Hysteroscopic Morcellation of Uterine Polyps and Myomas

Background: Hysteroscopic morcellation removes uterine pathology under direct visualization with continuous real-time tissue fragment removal. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of hysteroscopic morcellation across a diverse set of facilities, including both surgical and office-based settings. Design: This was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter registry development (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). Materials and Methods: Thirty-four U.S. obstetrics and gynecology facilities enrolled subjects into the registry. Inclusion criteria were women ages 18–65 with indications for hysteroscopic myomectomy and/or polypectomy who were treated with the MyoSure® Hysteroscopic Tissue Removal System (Hologic Inc., Marlborough, MA). Intrauterine lesion type/size and removal parameters, adverse events (AEs), and physician satisfaction ratings were recorded. Results: A total of 559 pathologies (187 fibroids; 372 polyps) were removed from 278 registered subjects (mean age: 43.9 ± 9.0 years), with 250 procedures (89.9%) performed in an ambulatory surgery center or hospital outpatient setting and 28 (10.1%) in a gynecologic office setting. Most patients (n = 206, 74.1%) were treated for abnormal uterine bleeding, and 42 (15.1%) were treated for infertility. Mean fibroid diameter was 2.2 ± 1.2 cm. Mean polyp diameter was 1.3 ± 1.0 cm. Overall mean percentage of pathology removed was 95.4% (polyps 99.3%, fibroids 86.8%). Five AEs included four incidents of blunt cervical trauma and a single postoperative case of pedal edema; all were considered mild and resolved spontaneously. Postprocedure surveys indicated that 95% of reporting physicians were “satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with device performance. Conclusions: Hysteroscopic morcellation of intrauterine pathology was accomplished safely with a high degree of physician satisfaction in 278 patients treated in diverse healthcare settings that are reflective of general community practice in the United States. (J GYNECOL SURG 32:318)