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

IF 16.4 1区化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2022-06-27 DOI:10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272

Evrim Ebru Kovalak

{"title":"Does \"no-touch\" technique hysteroscopy increase the risk of infection?","authors":"Evrim Ebru Kovalak","doi":"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/07/TJOG-19-145.PMC9249365.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

“无接触”技术宫腔镜会增加感染的风险吗?

目的:今天，由于其许多优点，宫腔镜结合阴道镜检查(无接触)越来越多地用于门诊诊断和治疗。然而，有人担心“无接触”技术会增加上行生殖道感染，因为没有插入窥器，而且无法对子宫颈进行消毒。材料与方法:比较2011年至2017年，302例经阴道镜入路宫腔镜患者(第一组)和254例经麻醉后在手术室采用标准方法宫腔镜患者(第二组)的早期并发症(术后2周内)。主要结局是术后早期感染，次要结局是其他早期并发症，如出血和破裂。结果:本研究经阴道镜入路宫腔镜手术成功率为96.4%。根据视觉模拟量表评分系统，88.7%的患者描述为轻度至中度疼痛。比较1组和2组术后感染发生率(分别为3%和2.4%)和其他早期并发症发生率(分别为0%和0.8%)，差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。结论:宫腔镜联合阴道镜入路仍然是安全且患者耐受良好的金标准方法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合

CiteScore

31.40

自引率

1.10%

发文量

312

审稿时长

2 months

期刊介绍： Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.