手术宫腔镜与超声引导下的电真空抽吸去除妊娠残留产物:一项前瞻性队列研究

IF 1.5 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Liselot P. Wagenaar , Hubertus A. van Vliet , Celine M. Radder , Louisette W. Peters , Steven Weyers , Benedictus C. Schoot , Tjalina W. Hamerlynck
{"title":"手术宫腔镜与超声引导下的电真空抽吸去除妊娠残留产物:一项前瞻性队列研究","authors":"Liselot P. Wagenaar ,&nbsp;Hubertus A. van Vliet ,&nbsp;Celine M. Radder ,&nbsp;Louisette W. Peters ,&nbsp;Steven Weyers ,&nbsp;Benedictus C. Schoot ,&nbsp;Tjalina W. Hamerlynck","doi":"10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To compare intrauterine adhesion (IUA) formation after hysteroscopic removal (HR) of retained products of conception (RPOC) with IUA formation after ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) and externally validate the outcomes of an RCT.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>This prospective cohort study was conducted from April 2015 until June 2022 in 2 Dutch teaching hospitals and one Belgian university hospital. Women opting for EVA underwent the procedure as soon as possible. In the HR group, the therapeutic hysteroscopy was performed at least eight weeks after the end of pregnancy. Postoperatively, an office second-look hysteroscopy was offered to all patients. Women were included if they had been diagnosed with RPOC ranging from 1 to 4 cm on ultrasound and did not want to participate in the RCT. EVA was performed using a Karman cannula. Operative hysteroscopy consisted either of hysteroscopic morcellation with the TruClear™ System or the Intrauterine BIGATTI Shaver or cold loop resection with a bipolar resectoscope.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 178 included women, 124 were treated with HR and 28 with EVA. Outcomes of HR and EVA did not differ significantly in terms of complications (5.6 % vs 3.6 %; p = 1.00). Second-look hysteroscopy showed IUAs in 14 of 91 women (15.4 %) after HR and in 1 of 16 (6.3 %) after EVA (p = .461). Completeness of removal was significantly higher (90.1 %) after HR than after EVA (68.8 %) (p = .035). Additional operative hysteroscopy was required in 14.3 % of the HR group versus 37.5 % in the EVA group (p = .036).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our cohort study, no significant differences in IUAs or complications were found. RPOC removal with HR was more often complete than removal with EVA, and additional therapeutic hysteroscopy was less frequently required after HR. These findings need to be correlated with those of RCTs.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical trial registration</h3><p>The study was registered in de Dutch Trial Register (NTR4923). Date of registration 23-11-2014. Date of first enrollment 01-01-2015. https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR4923</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37085,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/36/2d/main.PMC10493502.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Operative hysteroscopy versus ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration for removal of retained products of conception: A prospective cohort study\",\"authors\":\"Liselot P. Wagenaar ,&nbsp;Hubertus A. van Vliet ,&nbsp;Celine M. Radder ,&nbsp;Louisette W. Peters ,&nbsp;Steven Weyers ,&nbsp;Benedictus C. Schoot ,&nbsp;Tjalina W. Hamerlynck\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To compare intrauterine adhesion (IUA) formation after hysteroscopic removal (HR) of retained products of conception (RPOC) with IUA formation after ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) and externally validate the outcomes of an RCT.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>This prospective cohort study was conducted from April 2015 until June 2022 in 2 Dutch teaching hospitals and one Belgian university hospital. Women opting for EVA underwent the procedure as soon as possible. In the HR group, the therapeutic hysteroscopy was performed at least eight weeks after the end of pregnancy. Postoperatively, an office second-look hysteroscopy was offered to all patients. Women were included if they had been diagnosed with RPOC ranging from 1 to 4 cm on ultrasound and did not want to participate in the RCT. EVA was performed using a Karman cannula. Operative hysteroscopy consisted either of hysteroscopic morcellation with the TruClear™ System or the Intrauterine BIGATTI Shaver or cold loop resection with a bipolar resectoscope.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 178 included women, 124 were treated with HR and 28 with EVA. Outcomes of HR and EVA did not differ significantly in terms of complications (5.6 % vs 3.6 %; p = 1.00). Second-look hysteroscopy showed IUAs in 14 of 91 women (15.4 %) after HR and in 1 of 16 (6.3 %) after EVA (p = .461). Completeness of removal was significantly higher (90.1 %) after HR than after EVA (68.8 %) (p = .035). Additional operative hysteroscopy was required in 14.3 % of the HR group versus 37.5 % in the EVA group (p = .036).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our cohort study, no significant differences in IUAs or complications were found. RPOC removal with HR was more often complete than removal with EVA, and additional therapeutic hysteroscopy was less frequently required after HR. These findings need to be correlated with those of RCTs.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical trial registration</h3><p>The study was registered in de Dutch Trial Register (NTR4923). Date of registration 23-11-2014. Date of first enrollment 01-01-2015. https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR4923</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/36/2d/main.PMC10493502.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590161323000558\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590161323000558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的比较宫腔镜下保留妊娠产物(RPOC)摘除后宫内粘连(IUA)的形成与超声引导下电真空吸引(EVA)后宫内粘连的形成,并从外部验证随机对照试验的结果。研究设计这项前瞻性队列研究于2015年4月至2022年6月在两家荷兰教学医院和一家比利时大学医院进行。选择EVA的妇女尽快接受了手术。HR组在妊娠结束后至少8周进行治疗性宫腔镜检查。术后,所有患者都接受了办公室复诊宫腔镜检查。如果女性在超声检查中被诊断为1至4厘米的RPOC,并且不想参加随机对照试验,则将其纳入研究。使用卡门套管进行EVA。宫腔镜手术包括使用TruClear进行宫腔镜粉碎™ 系统或宫内BIGATTI剃须刀或双极电切镜冷环切除术。结果178例患者中,124例接受HR治疗,28例接受EVA治疗。HR和EVA的结果在并发症方面没有显著差异(5.6%vs 3.6%;p=1.00)。再次检查宫腔镜显示,HR后91名女性中有14名(15.4%)出现宫内节育器,EVA后16名中有1名(6.3%)出现IUA(p=.461)。HR后切除的完成率(90.1%)显著高于EVA后(68.8%)(p=.035)。14.3%的HR需要额外的宫腔镜手术结论在我们的队列研究中,IUAs或并发症没有发现显著差异。HR切除RPOC比EVA切除RPOC更容易完成,HR后不太需要额外的治疗性宫腔镜检查。这些发现需要与随机对照试验的结果相关联。临床试验注册该研究已在荷兰试验注册中心(NTR4923)注册。注册日期2014年11月23日。首次入学日期2015年1月1日。https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR4923
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Operative hysteroscopy versus ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration for removal of retained products of conception: A prospective cohort study

Objectives

To compare intrauterine adhesion (IUA) formation after hysteroscopic removal (HR) of retained products of conception (RPOC) with IUA formation after ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) and externally validate the outcomes of an RCT.

Study design

This prospective cohort study was conducted from April 2015 until June 2022 in 2 Dutch teaching hospitals and one Belgian university hospital. Women opting for EVA underwent the procedure as soon as possible. In the HR group, the therapeutic hysteroscopy was performed at least eight weeks after the end of pregnancy. Postoperatively, an office second-look hysteroscopy was offered to all patients. Women were included if they had been diagnosed with RPOC ranging from 1 to 4 cm on ultrasound and did not want to participate in the RCT. EVA was performed using a Karman cannula. Operative hysteroscopy consisted either of hysteroscopic morcellation with the TruClear™ System or the Intrauterine BIGATTI Shaver or cold loop resection with a bipolar resectoscope.

Results

Of 178 included women, 124 were treated with HR and 28 with EVA. Outcomes of HR and EVA did not differ significantly in terms of complications (5.6 % vs 3.6 %; p = 1.00). Second-look hysteroscopy showed IUAs in 14 of 91 women (15.4 %) after HR and in 1 of 16 (6.3 %) after EVA (p = .461). Completeness of removal was significantly higher (90.1 %) after HR than after EVA (68.8 %) (p = .035). Additional operative hysteroscopy was required in 14.3 % of the HR group versus 37.5 % in the EVA group (p = .036).

Conclusion

In our cohort study, no significant differences in IUAs or complications were found. RPOC removal with HR was more often complete than removal with EVA, and additional therapeutic hysteroscopy was less frequently required after HR. These findings need to be correlated with those of RCTs.

Clinical trial registration

The study was registered in de Dutch Trial Register (NTR4923). Date of registration 23-11-2014. Date of first enrollment 01-01-2015. https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR4923

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
58 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信