Mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal or hysteroscopic morcellator: understanding the past to predict the future. A narrative review

Abnormal uterine bleeding: The well-known and the hidden face

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a bleeding from the uterine corpus that is abnormal in regularity, volume, frequency or duration. It encompasses heavy menstrual bleeding, irregular menstrual bleeding and intermenstrual bleeding, which are common symptoms among women of reproductive age, impacting their overall well-being. Menstruation involves interactions between endometrial epithelial and stromal cells, immune cell influx, and changes in endometrial vasculature. These events resemble an inflammatory response with increased vessel permeability, tissue breakdown, and the arrival of innate immune cells. However, the mechanisms of menstrual cessation are poorly understood. AUB can be related to structural causes (polyp, adenomyosis, leiomyoma, malignancy/hyperplasia) and nonstructural conditions (coagulopathy, ovulatory dysfunction, endometrial, iatrogenic). While transvaginal ultrasound is the primary method for the screening of intracavitary lesions, saline infusion sonohysterography is more accurate to detect endometrial polyps and submucous leiomyomas, while hysteroscopy with biopsy remains the reference method for a definitive diagnosis. The main goals in managing AUB are addressing and correcting the underlying primary cause, if possible, and establishing a regular bleeding pattern or amenorrhea, which can be done with antifibrinolytic agents, progestins, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists, or surgical interventions, each one with specific indications and limitations. Further research is necessary to assess the effectiveness and the long-term effects of various medical and surgical treatments. Meanwhile, the availability of diagnostic methods such as transvaginal ultrasound and hysteroscopy and the universal distribution of medical treatments for AUB should be prioritized by policymakers to minimize the diagnostic and treatment delay and thus reduce the risk of AUB-related anemia and the need of hysterectomy.

Effectiveness of Manual Hysteroscopic Tissue Removal Device for Intrauterine Polyps in Infertile Women in Both Operating and Office Settings

Background: Mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal (mHTR) systems are widely used for removing intrauterine pathology. Given the startup and procedural costs for electrically powered mechanical units, disposable manual mHTR systems have been developed. Methods: With little published, we describe its effectiveness for hysteroscopic intrauterine polypectomy. Results: One-hundred fifty-seven infertile women underwent hysteroscopic polypectomy with the manual mHTR device. Complete removal was accomplished in all but three cases, with blood loss being <10 mL and all specimens deemed sufficient for histopathologic diagnosis. Conclusions: These results suggest that the disposable manual mHTR system is effective in removing endometrial polyps. Head-to-head comparisons with other alternative technologies are needed.

Evaluation of whether there is residual polyp tissue after hysteroscopic morcellation at Cam and Sakura City Hospital: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In polypectomy with mechanical hysteroscopic morcellators, the tissue removal procedure continues until no polyp tissue remains. The decision that the polypoid tissues were removed completely is made based on visual evaluation. In a situation where the polyp tissue was visually completely removed and no doubt that the polyp has been completely removed, short spindle-like tissue fragments on the polyp floor continue in most patients. There are no studies in the literature on whether visual evaluation provides adequate information at the cellular level in many patients in whom polypoid tissues have been determined to be completely removed. The aim of the present study was to analyze the pathological results of the curettage procedure, which was applied following the completion of polyp removal with operative hysteroscopy, and to evaluate whether there was residual polyp tissue in the short spindle-like tissue fragments that the mechanical hysteroscopic morcellator could not remove. The secondary aims of this study were to compare conventional loop resection hysteroscopy with hysteroscopic morcellation for the removal of endometrial polyps in terms of hemoglobin/hematocrit changes, polypectomy time and the amount of medium deficit.

METHODS

A total of 70 patients with a single pedunculate polypoid image of 1.5-2 cm, which was primarily visualized by office hysteroscopy, were included in the study. Patients who had undergone hysteroscopic polypectomy were divided into two groups according to the surgical device used: the morcellator group (n = 35, Group M) and the resectoscope group (n = 35, Group R). The histopathological results of hysteroscopic specimens and curettage materials of patients who had undergone curettage at the end of operative hysteroscopy were evaluated. In addition, the postoperative 24th hour Hb/HCT decrease amounts in percentage, the polypectomy time which was measured from the start of morcellation, and deficit differences were compared between groups.

RESULTS

In total, 7 patients in the morcellator group had residual polyp tissue detected in the full curettage material. The blood loss was lower in the morcellator group than in the resectoscope group (M, R; (-0.07 ± 0.08), (-0,11 ± 0.06), (p < 0.05), respectively). The deficit value of the morcellator group were higher (M, R; (500 ml), (300 ml), (p < 0.05), respectively). The polypectomy time was shorter in the morcellator group (M, R; mean (2.30 min), (4.6 min), (p < 0.05)).

CONCLUSIONS

Even if the lesion is completely visibly removed during hysteroscopic morcellation, extra caution should be taken regarding the possibility of residual tissue. There is a need for new studies investigating the presence of residual polyp tissue.

Guideline No. 435: Minimally Invasive Surgery in Fertility Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits and risks of minimally invasive procedures in the management of patients with infertility and provide guidance to gynaecologists who manage common conditions in these patients.

TARGET POPULATION

Patients with infertility (inability to conceive after 12 months of unprotected intercourse) undergoing investigation and treatment.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Minimally invasive reproductive surgery can be used to treat infertility, improve fertility treatment outcomes, or preserve fertility. All surgery has risks and associated complications. Reproductive surgery may not improve fertility outcomes and may, in some instances, damage ovarian reserve. All procedures have costs, which are borne either by the patient or their health insurance provider.

EVIDENCE

We searched English-language articles from January 2010 to May 2021 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (see Appendix A for MeSH search terms).

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix B (Tables B1 for definitions and B2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Gynaecologists who manage common conditions in patients with infertility.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Directive clinique no 435 : Chirurgie minimalement invasive dans les traitements de fertilité

OBJECTIF

Évaluer les risques et bénéfices de la chirurgie minimalement invasive dans la prise en charge des patientes atteintes d'infertilité et fournir des conseils aux gynécologues qui prennent en charge les problèmes les plus fréquents chez ces patientes.

POPULATION CIBLE

Patientes atteintes d'infertilité (incapacité à concevoir après 12 mois de rapports sexuels non protégés) en processus diagnostique ou sous traitement. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: On peut recourir à la chirurgie de la reproduction minimalement invasive pour traiter l'infertilité, améliorer les résultats des traitements de fertilité ou préserver la fertilité. Toutes les interventions chirurgicales comportent des risques et des complications associées. La chirurgie de la reproduction n'améliore pas toujours la fertilité et peut, dans certains cas, compromettre la réserve ovarienne. Toutes les interventions entraînent des coûts, lesquels sont assumés par la patiente ou son assureur. DONNéES PROBANTES: Des recherches ont été faites dans les bases de données PubMed-Medline, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus et Cochrane Library pour répertorier les articles publiés en anglais dans la période de janvier 2010 à mai 2021 (voir les termes de recherche MeSH à l'annexe A). MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe B en ligne (tableau B1 pour les définitions et tableau B2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Gynécologues qui prennent en charge les affections courantes chez les patientes atteintes d'infertilité. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.

Endometrial polypectomy using tissue removal device or electrosurgical snare: a randomised controlled trial

Background: Hysteroscopic transcervical resection of endometrial polyps is a widely used method and is increasingly performed in office or outpatient care. To ensure patient comfort is key, smaller instruments are preferred while also achieving a complete resection of the pathology. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of the electrosurgical polyp snare (DPS) in comparison with a tissue removal device (TRD). Materials and Methods: This was a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial which included 66 women with symptomatic endometrial polyps who had been referred to the gynaecological outpatient clinic at the Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands. The patients were randomly allocated by using sealed envelopes to treatment with either the DPS (Duckbill®, Cook) or the TRD (Truclear™, Medtronic). Clinicians and patients were not blinded to the treatment performed. An independent observer blindly assessed the results. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the complete removal of the endometrial polyp. Secondary outcomes were woman acceptability and pain during the procedure, operating time, peri-operative and immediate postoperative complications. Results: 57% of the polyps in the DPS group and 95% in the TRD group were completely removed (risk difference -0.39; 95% CI: -0.60 to -0.15). Average operating time was longer with DPS compared to the TRD (11.7 min. vs. 6.8 min., p = 0.018). The number of insertions of the hysteroscope was higher with the DPS compared to the TRD (3.9 vs. 1.7, p <0.001). One serious adverse event, a uterine perforation, occurred in the DPS group. Conclusion: The TRD was superior to the DPS in completeness of polyp removal. What is new? TRD has a higher rate of complete polyp resection, overall safety and higher patient satisfaction, this instrument should be considered as the preferred option in outpatient and office gynaecology.

Hysteroembryoscopy and hysteroscopic uterine evacuation of early pregnancy loss: A feasible procedure in selected cases

Hysteroscopic uterine evacuation of early pregnancy loss using tissue removal devices seems to be a safe and feasible procedure in selected cases. The hysteroscopic approach allows the precise localisation of the gestational sac inside the uterine cavity. The endoscopic approach allows one to perform hysteroembryoscopy before uterine evacuation and this technique appears to be more accurate than dilatation & curettage for fetal chromosome karyotyping, with lower maternal cell contamination. This “under vision” procedure may reduce retained products of conception rates and risk of intrauterine adhesions formation.

Endometrial biopsy under direct hysteroscopic visualisation versus blind endometrial sampling for the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Endometrial cancer is the most common gynaecological neoplasia in western countries. Diagnosis of endometrial cancer requires an endometrial biopsy. A good quality endometrial biopsy allows not only the identification of the pathology, but also preoperative histologic subtype classification. Endometrial biopsy can be performed under direct hysteroscopic visualisation, but also using blind sampling techniques Objectives: To compare endometrial biopsy performed under direct hysteroscopic visualisation versus blind sampling for the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer. Materials and Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Electronic databases were searched from their inception until March 2022.We included all studies comparing endometrial biopsy performed under direct hysteroscopic visualisation versus blind endometrial sampling. Main outcome measures: Sample adequacy, failure rate to detect endometrial cancer or endometrial hyperplasia, and rate of detection of endometrial cancer. The summary measures were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% of confidence interval (CI). Results: Four studies with a total of 1,295 patients were included. Endometrial biopsy under direct hysteroscopic visualisation was associated with a significantly higher rate of sample adequacy (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.17), and significantly lower risk of failure to detect endometrial cancer or endometrial hyperplasia (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.92) compared to blind endometrial sampling. However, there was no significant difference between endometrial biopsies taken under direct hysteroscopic visualisation or blindly, with or without a preceding diagnostic hysteroscopy, in the rate of detection of endometrial cancer (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.06). Conclusion: Hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy under direct visualisation is associated with significantly higher rate of sample adequacy and is comparable to blind endometrial sampling for the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and precancer. What is new? Hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy under direct visualisation would be expected to reduce diagnostic failure for endometrial cancer compared to blind endometrial sampling.