Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:22:13.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 19 - Research and New Developments in Hysteroscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2020

By
Paul Smith  and
T. Justin Clark
Edited by
Mary E. Connor  and
T. Justin Clark
Mary E. Connor
Affiliation:
Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield
T. Justin Clark
Affiliation:
Birmingham Women’s Hospital
Get access

Summary

One of the fundamental maxims of surgery is to work with excellent visualisation of the operative field. The dark, inaccessible nature of the uterine cavity has led to procedures in this environment being conducted ‘blindly’, flying in the face of the surgical axiom of good visualisation. Dilatation and curettage, or ‘D&C’, was the defining procedure of gynaecology for the diagnosis and treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding and miscarriage.

Type
Chapter
Information
Diagnostic and Operative Hysteroscopy , pp. 235 - 248
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cooper, NAM, Smith, P, Khan, KS, Clark, TJ. Does cervical preparation before outpatient hysteroscopy reduce women’s pain experience? A systematic review. BJOG 2011; 118: 1292–301.Google Scholar
Issat, T, Beta, J, Nowicka, MA, Maciejewski, T, Jakimiuk, AJ. A randomized, single blind, placebo-controlled trial for the pain reduction during the outpatient hysteroscopy after ketoprofen or intravaginal misoprostol. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21: 921–7.Google Scholar
El-Mazny, A, Abou-Salem, N. A double-blind randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming before outpatient hysteroscopy. Fertil Steril 2011; 96: 962–5.Google Scholar
Hassa, H, Aydin, Y, Oge, T, Cicek, K. Effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol and rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug in vaginoscopic diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy in primarily infertile women: double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013; 20: 880–5.Google Scholar
Al-Fozan, H, Firwana, B, Al Kadri, H, Hassan, S, Tulandi, T. Preoperative ripening of the cervix before operative hysteroscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (4): CD005998.Google Scholar
Cooper, NAM, Khan, KS, Clark, TJ. Local anaesthesia for pain control during outpatient hysteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2010; 340: c1130.Google Scholar
Kumar, V, Gupta, JK. Hysteroscopic local anaesthetic intrauterine cornual ‘focal local’ block before endometrial ablation with direct cervical block in an outpatient setting: a feasibility study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013; 170: 222–4.Google Scholar
Skensved, H. Combining paracervical block with a complete fundal block significantly reduces patients’ perception of pain during radio-frequency endometrial ablation in an office setting. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22(6S): S45.Google Scholar
Kumar, V, Tryposkiadis, K, Gupta, JK. Hysteroscopic local anesthetic intrauterine cornual block in office endometrial ablation: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2016; 105(2): 474–80.e1.Google Scholar
Celik, C, Tasdemir, N, Abali, R, et al. The effect of uterine straightening by bladder distention before outpatient hysteroscopy: a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 180: 89–92.Google Scholar
Cooper, NAM, Smith, P, Khan, KS, Clark, TJ. Vaginoscopic approach to outpatient hysteroscopy: a systematic review of the effect on pain. BJOG 2010; 117: 532–9.Google Scholar
Smith, PP, Kolhe, S, O’Connor, S, Clark, TJ. Vaginoscopy Against Standard Treatment (VAST): a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2019; 126: 891–9.Google Scholar
Madari, S, Al-Shabibi, N, Papalampros, P, Papadimitriou, A, Magos, A. A randomised trial comparing the H Pipelle with the standard Pipelle for endometrial sampling at ‘no-touch’ (vaginoscopic) hysteroscopy. BJOG 2009; 116: 32–7.Google Scholar
van Hanegem, N, Breijer, MC, Slockers, SA, et al. Diagnostic workup for postmenopausal bleeding: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2017; 124: 231–40.Google Scholar
Clark, TJ. Hysteroscopy is needed in the diagnostic workup of postmenopausal bleeding. BJOG 2017; 124: 241.Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: Assessment and Management. NICE Guideline NG88. London: NICE; 2018. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng88 (accessed November 2019).Google Scholar
Birinyi, L, Daragó, P, Török, P, et al. Predictive value of hysteroscopic examination in intrauterine abnormalities. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 115: 75–9.Google Scholar
de Freitas Fonseca, M, Sessa, FV, Resende, JAD, et al. Identifying predictors of unacceptable pain at office hysteroscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21: 586–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zayed, SM, Elsetohy, KA, Zayed, M, Fouda, UM. Factors affecting pain experienced during office hysteroscopy. Middle East Fertil Soc J 2015; 20: 154–8.Google Scholar
Angioli, R, De Cicco Nardone, C, Plotti, F, et al. Use of music to reduce anxiety during office hysteroscopy: prospective randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21: 454–9.Google Scholar
Mak, N, Reinders, IMA, Slockers, SA, et al. The effect of music in gynaecological office procedures on pain, anxiety and satisfaction: a randomized controlled trial. Gynecol Surg 2017; 14: 14.Google Scholar
Carta, G, Palermo, P, Marinangeli, F, et al. Waiting time and pain during office hysteroscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012; 19: 360–4.Google Scholar
Ogden, J, Heinrich, M, Potter, C, Kent, A, Jones, S. The impact of viewing a hysteroscopy on a screen on the patient’s experience: a randomised trial. BJOG 2009; 116: 286–93.Google Scholar
Nappi, L, Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Spinelli, M, et al. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study to assess whether antibiotic administration should be recommended during office operative hysteroscopy. Reprod Sci Thousand Oaks Calif 2013; 20: 755–61.Google Scholar
Gregoriou, O, Bakas, P, Grigoriadis, C, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in diagnostic hysteroscopy: is it necessary or not? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012; 163: 190–2.Google Scholar
Thinkhamrop, J, Laopaiboon, M, Lumbiganon, P. Prophylactic antibiotics for transcervical intrauterine procedures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (5): CD005637.Google Scholar
Papalampros, P, Gambadauro, P, Papadopoulos, N, et al. The mini-resectoscope: a new instrument for office hysteroscopic surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88: 227–30.Google Scholar
Dealberti, D, Riboni, F, Prigione, S, et al. New mini-resectoscope: analysis of preliminary quality results in outpatient hysteroscopic polypectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013; 288: 349–53.Google Scholar
Clark, TJ, Samuels, N, Malick, S, et al. Bipolar radiofrequency compared with thermal balloon endometrial ablation in the office: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 1228.Google Scholar
Bongers, MY, Bourdrez, P, Mol, BWJ, Heintz, APM, Brölmann, HAM. Randomised controlled trial of bipolar radio-frequency endometrial ablation and balloon endometrial ablation. BJOG 2004; 111: 1095–102.Google Scholar
Smith, PP, Malick, S, Clark, TJ. Bipolar radiofrequency compared with thermal balloon ablation in the office: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124: 219–25.Google Scholar
Herman, MC, Penninx, JPM, Mol, BW, Bongers, MY. Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding. BJOG 2013; 120: 966–70.Google Scholar
Prasad, P, Powell, MC. Prospective observational study of Thermablate Endometrial Ablation System as an outpatient procedure. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2008; 15: 476–9.Google Scholar
Coad, JE, Castillo-Saenz, L, Blend, BC, Rubenstein, JN, Garza-Leal, JG. LibrataTM: a fully hand-held endometrial ablation device: proof of concept using extirpated human uteri. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22: S100.Google Scholar
Laberge, P, Garza-Leal, J, Fortin, C, et al. One-year follow-up results of a multicenter, single-arm, objective performance criteria-controlled international clinical study of the safety and efficacy of the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22: 1169–77.Google Scholar
Laberge, P, Garza-Leal, J, Fortin, C, et al. A randomized controlled multicenter US Food and Drug Administration trial of the safety and efficacy of the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System: one-year follow-up results. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017; 24: 124–32.Google Scholar
Thurkow, A. Preliminary results of a multicenter trial of safety and efficacy of the AEGEA Vapor System for the treatment of menorrhagia. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21: S147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garza-Leal, JG, Castillo-Saenz, L, Coad, JE. The Channel MedSystems Device for endometrial cryoablation: a peri-hysterectomy study of a completely handheld device for endometrial cryoablation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21(6): S141.Google Scholar
Mao, J, Pfeifer, S, Schlegel, P, Sedrakyan, A. Safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic sterilization compared with laparoscopic sterilization: an observational cohort study. BMJ 2015; 351: h5162.Google Scholar
Ligt-Veneman, NG, Tinga, DJ, Kragt, H, Brandsma, G, van der Leij, G. The efficacy of intratubal silicone in the Ovabloc hysteroscopic method of sterilization. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78: 824–5.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×