Abstract
Background: A retrospective study that analysed data for three consecutive years from the Hysteroscopy Clinic at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Valme University Hospital.
Objective: To analyse the data of lesions removed in the hysteroscopy clinic in comparison with those scheduled for the operating room to show that hysteroscopy could be a more effective procedure.
Methods: Patients undergoing operative hysteroscopy for various indications were included. The 5 mm Bettocchi hysteroscopes and the 5.8 mm Palex Mini-Resectoscope were used.
Results: A total of 1233 patients were seen in the hysteroscopy clinic between 2015 and 2017. In 2015, 344 hysteroscopies were performed, of which 57 (16.5%) were performed in the operating room. In 2016, 445 hysteroscopies were performed and 46 (10.3%) were scheduled in the operating room. During 2017, a total of 444 hysteroscopies were performed, of which only 6 (1.3%) were performed in the operating room (P < 0.001). Five large fibroids and one case of complex polyp were removed in the operating room in 2017. The mini-resector was used in 202 cases (45.4%). Paracervical local anaesthesia was given to 383 (86.2%) patients.
Conclusion: The data obtained in our study shows a significant reduction in the number of hysteroscopies scheduled for surgery in 2017 (1.3%) and, therefore, hysteroscopy has been shown to be a more effective procedure. This trend may be due to the introduction of the mini-resectoscope and the use of paracervical local anaesthesia.
Keywords: Clinical pathway, hysteroscopic surgery, office hysteroscopy, operative hysteroscopy, outpatient hysteroscopy, paracervical anaesthesia, submucosal myoma.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70196-5] [PMID: 8678126]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2015.1105209] [PMID: 26527251]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13434] [PMID: 26011792]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00393]
[PMID: 10521122]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1471-7697(01)80030-7]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2754-7] [PMID: 23417150]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2015.12.016] [PMID: 26767826]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmm041] [PMID: 18063608]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15665] [PMID: 30801889]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12560] [PMID: 27861704]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0974-0]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2016.02.007] [PMID: 27055773]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/SARH1212728K] [PMID: 23350246]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0926-0] [PMID: 27226786]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2017.08.009] [PMID: 28803811]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/905204] [PMID: 26090457]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000475] [PMID: 29939852]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3836-5] [PMID: 26253336]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1074-3804(05)80106-9] [PMID: 9050568]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.01.030] [PMID: 26873675]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.11.018] [PMID: 21255900]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gmit.2016.08.001]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5309408] [PMID: 28676733]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11597.x] [PMID: 10645879]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/j.1600-0412.2000.079007593.x] [PMID: 10929961]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1074-3804(05)60042-4] [PMID: 15559340]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2013.782277] [PMID: 24359051]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2010.07.009] [PMID: 20955982]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0895-3] [PMID: 26283891]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.08.015] [PMID: 20926175]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02832-1] [PMID: 11704141]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.07.039] [PMID: 26797202]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14567] [PMID: 28109045]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.08.002] [PMID: 27523921]
[PMID: 25134285]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1066] [PMID: 20728083]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.03.012] [PMID: 25958129]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gmit.2013.05.005]