Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T13:09:39.167Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 44 - Advanced Hysteroscopy

from Section 10 - Operative Gynaecology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2021

Tahir Mahmood
Affiliation:
Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy
Charles Savona-Ventura
Affiliation:
University of Malta, Malta
Ioannis Messinis
Affiliation:
University of Thessaly, Greece
Sambit Mukhopadhyay
Affiliation:
Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, UK
Get access

Summary

The improvements in techniques, endoscopic instrumentation and surgical experience have completely changed the approach to uterine intracavitary pathologies, allowing the physician to achieve more reliable diagnostic and therapeutic results. The advent of these new technologies allows us today to improve advanced hysteroscopic surgery by increasing the efficacy of an operating room environment but avoiding the need for the inpatient setting for most of the procedures. It is possible to treat severe cervical stenosis or intrauterine synechiae, including Asherman’s syndrome, G2 myomas, congenital uterine malformations, adenomyosis and chronically retained products of conception in an ambulatory setting. The future looks to further the simplification of instrumentation, and establish a safer and easier delivery of energy sources.

This chapter provides a description of advanced hysteroscopic procedures and their benefits in modern gynaecological practice.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

Campo, R, Meier, R, Dhont, N, Mestdagh, G, Ombelet, W. Implementation of hysteroscopy in an infertility clinic: the one-stop uterine diagnosis and treatment. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2014;6:235239.Google Scholar
Perez-Medina, T, Lopez-Mora, P, Rojo, J. Comparison of the hysteroscopy-biopsy with the D & C in the diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding. Progresos de Obstetricia y Ginecologia 1994;37:479486.Google Scholar
Janssens, JP, Rotenberg, L, Sentis, M, Motmans, K, Schulz-Wendtland, R. Caution with microbiopsies of the breast: displaced cancer cells and ballistics. Eur J Cancer Prev 2006;15;471473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bettocchi, S, Bramante, S, Bifulco, G, et al. Challenging the cervix: strategies to overcome the anatomic impediments to hysteroscopy: analysis of 31,052 office hysteroscopies. Fertil Steril 2016;105: e16e17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campo, R, Molinas, CR, Rombauts, L, et al. Prospective multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of office diagnostic hysteroscopy. Hum Reprod 2005;20:258263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guida, M, Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Sparice, S, et al. Vaginoscopic versus traditional office hysteroscopy: a randomized controlled study. Hum Reprod 2006;21:3253–32 7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
AAGL. AAGL Practice Report: Practice Guidelines for Management Of Intrauterine Synechiae. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010;17:17.Google Scholar
Campo, R, Van Belle, Y, Rombauts, L, Brosens, I, Gordts, S. Office minihysteroscopy. Hum Reprod Update 1999;5:7381.Google Scholar
Roy, KK, Lingampally, A, Kansal, Y, et al. Pilot study comparing hysteroscopic adhesiolysis by conventional resectoscope versus mini-resectoscope. Oman Med J 2017;32:492498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Calagna, G, Scognamiglio, M, et al. Prevention of intrauterine post-surgical adhesions in hysteroscopy: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;203:182192.Google Scholar
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Spinelli, M, Bramante, S, et al. Efficacy of a polyethylene oxide-sodium carboxymethylcellulose gel in prevention of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopic surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011;18:462469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bettocchi, S, Ceci, O, Di Venere, R, et al. Advanced operative office hysteroscopy without anaesthesia: analysis of 501 cases treated with a 5 Fr, bipolar electrode. Hum Reprod 2002;17:24352438.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;88:227230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noventa, M, Ancona, E, Quaranta, M, et al. Intrauterine morcellator devices: the icon of hysteroscopic future or merely a marketing image? A systematic review regarding safety, efficacy, advantages, and contraindications. Reprod Sci 2015;22:12891296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Mazzon, I, Bramante, S, et al. Hysteroscopic myomectomy: a comprehensive review of surgical techniques. Hum Reprod Update 2008;14:101109.Google Scholar
Emanuel, MH, Wamsteker, K. The intrauterine morcellator: a new hysteroscopic operating technique to remove intrauterine polyps and fibroid. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2005;12:6283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettocchi, S, Di Spiezio, A, Ceci, O, et al. A new hysteroscopic technique for the preparation of partially intramural myomas in office setting (OPPIuM technique): a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2009;16:748754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazzon, I. Nuova tecnica per la miomectomia isteroscopia: enucleazione con ansa fredda. In: Testo-Atlante di Chirurgia Endoscopica Ginecologica. Palermo: COFESE, 1995.Google Scholar
Litta, P, Vasile, C, Merlin, F, et al. A new technique of hysteroscopic myomectomy with enucleation in toto. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2003;10:263270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamou, J. Electroresection of fibroids. In: Endoscopic Surgery for Gynecologists. London: W.B. Saunders, 1993, pp. 327330.Google Scholar
Bigatti, G, Ferrario, C, Rosales, M, Baglioni, A, Bianchi, S. A 4-cm G2 cervical submucosal myoma removed with the IBS® Integrated Bigatti Shaver. Gynecol Surg 2012;9:453456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordts, S, Grimbizis, G, Campo, R. Symptoms and classifications of uterine adenomyosis, including the place of hysteroscopy in diagnosis. Fertil Steril 2018;109:380388.Google Scholar
Molinas, CR, Campo, R. Office hysteroscopy and adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006;20:557567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Calagna, G, Santangelo, F, et al. The role of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of adenomyosis. Bio Med Res Int 2017;2017: 2518396.Google ScholarPubMed
Grimbizis, GF, Gordts, S, Di Spiezio Sardo, A, et al. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod 2013;28:20322044.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meier, R, Campo, R. T-shaped uterus in Female Genital Tract Congenital Malformations: Classification, Diagnosis, and Management. London: Springer, 2015.Google Scholar
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Florio, P, Nazzaro, G, et al. Hysteroscopic outpatient metroplasty to expand dysmorphic uteri (HoMe- DU technique): a pilot study. Reprod Biomed Online 2015;30:166174.Google Scholar
Homer, HA, Li, TC, Cooke, ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril 2000;73:114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Spiezio Sardo, A, Zizolfi, B, Bettocchi, S, et al. Accuracy of hysteroscopic metroplasty with the combination of presurgical 3-dimensional ultrasonography and a novel graduated intrauterine palpator: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016;23:557566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGurgan, P, O’Donovan, P. Second-generation endometrial ablation: an overview. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2007;21:931945.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angioni, S, Pontis, A, Nappi, L, et al. Endometrial ablation: first vs second generation techniques. Minerva Gynecol 2016;68:143153.Google ScholarPubMed
Capmas, P, Lobersztajn, A, Duminil, L, et al. Operative hysteroscopy for retained products of conception: efficacy and subsequent fertility. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2019;48:151154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldenberg, M, Schiff, E, Achiron, R, et al. Managing residual trophoblastic tissue: hysteroscopy for directing curettage. J Reprod Med 1997;42:2628.Google ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org 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
×