Fertility outcomes after hysteroscopic removal of intrauterine leiomyomas and polyps

Reproductive surgery remains an essential element of reproductive medicine

Background

Reproductive surgery has long been neglected and is perceived to be simple surgery that can be undertaken by all gynaecologists. However, given the ever-expanding knowledge in the field, reproductive surgery now comprises surgical interventions on female reproductive organs that need to be carefully planned and executed with consideration given to the individuals symptoms, function of the organ and fertility concerns.

Objectives

To discuss the different perspectives of reproductive surgeons and other gynaecological surgeons, e.g., gynaecological oncologists, and advanced minimally invasive surgeons, regarding diagnosis and management of pelvic pathology that affects reproductive potential. Furthermore, to highlight the gaps in knowledge and numerous controversies surrounding reproductive surgery, while summarising the current opinion on management.

Materials and Methods

Narrative review based on literature and the cumulative experience of the authors.

Main outcome measures

The paper does not address specific research questions.

Conclusions

Reproductive surgery encompasses all reproductive organs with the aim of alleviating symptoms whilst restoring and preserving function with careful consideration given to alternatives such as expectant management, medical treatments, and assisted reproductive techniques. It necessitates utmost technical expertise and sufficient knowledge of the female genital anatomy and physiology, together with a thorough understanding of and respect to of ovarian reserve, tubal function, and integrity of the uterine anatomy, as well as an up-to-date knowledge of alternatives, mainly assisted reproductive technology.

What is new?

A holistic approach to infertile women is only possible by focusing on the field of reproductive medicine and surgery, which is unattainable while practicing in multiple fields.

Diode laser use in hysteroscopic surgery: current status and future perspectives

Recent advances in surgical technology and innovative techniques have revolutionized surgical gynecology, including transcervical hysteroscopic procedures. Surgical lasers (Nd-Yag, Argon, diode, and CO2 lasers) have been promoted to remove a variety of gynecological pathologies. For hysteroscopic surgery, the diode laser represents the most versatile and feasible innovation, with simultaneous cut and coagulate action, providing improved hemostasis compared with CO2 laser. The newest diode laser devices exhibit increased power and a dual wavelength, to work precisely with reduced thermal dispersion and minimal damage to surrounding tissues. Their efficacy and safety have been validated both in the hospitals as well as in the office setting. Updated evidence reports that several hysteroscopic procedures, including endometrial polypectomies, myomectomies and metroplasties can be successfully performed with a diode laser. Therefore, this review aimed to give a deeper understanding of the role of laser energy in gynecology and subsequently in hysteroscopy in order to safely incorporate this technology into clinical practice.

Direct hysteroscopic endometrial sampling and pipelle sampling in perimenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Abnormal uterine bleeding is a common cause of hospital admission in perimenopausal women. It can be the first sign of many diseases such as endometrial cancer and endometrial hyperplasia. Endometrial sampling is valuable in early diagnosis and treatment. Although hysterectomy is the gold standard in the diagnosis of endometrial pathology, it is not considered an acceptable method for diagnosis. With the principle of "see and treat, hysteroscopy seems to be the most successful method.

METHODS

After obtaining the necessary ethics committee approval, we obtained liquid-based cytology samples of our perimenopausal patients who frequently applied to our outpatient clinic with abnormal uterine bleeding. To conduct endometrial sampling of our patients, we used pipelle aspiration method in our 75-disease group and direct hysteroscopic sampling method in our other 75 disease group. We then compared the pre- and postoperative pathology results.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative pathological results in both pipelle and hysteroscopic sampling groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of endometrial pathologies by hysteroscopic method and pipelle method has high sensitivity and specificity. Gynecologists may determine the method preference according to the status of the health system together with their patients.