Noam Smorgick1, Oshri Barel2, Noga Fuchs2, Ido Ben-Ami2, Moty Pansky2, Zvi Vaknin2. 1. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Affiliated with the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. Electronic address: noam_yossi@yahoo.com. 2. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Affiliated with the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hysteroscopic removal of retained products of conception (RPOC) may allow complete removal of RPOC and decreased rates of intrauterine adhesions (IUA) when compared to the traditional blind curettage. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the current evidence regarding the use of hysteroscopy for treatment of RPOC. STUDY DESIGN: A literature search was conducted in December 2012 using MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials. The study selection criteria were use of the standard hysteroscopic technique for removal of RPOC in 5 or more cases, in any study design. We reviewed 11 studies, of which 5 retrospective studies met the selection criteria (comprising 326 cases). The rates of incomplete RPOC removal, surgical complications, post-operative IUA and subsequent pregnancies were abstracted and weighted events rates using a fixed meta-analysis model were calculated. RESULTS: Only one study compared the rates of IUA following hysteroscopy and curettage, precluding a meta-analysis comparison of the two techniques. There were no cases of incomplete RPOC removal. Three perioperative complications occurred (uterine perforation, infection, and vaginal bleeding). IUA on follow-up hysteroscopy were found in 4/96 women (weighted rate of 5.7%, 95% CI 2.4%, 13.0%). Of the 120 women desiring a subsequent pregnancy 91 conceived (weighted rate of 75.3%, 95% CI 66.7%, 82.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The lack of traditional curettage comparison groups in most studies precludes the conclusion that hysteroscopy is superior to traditional curettage, but this procedure does appear to have low complication rates, low rates of IUA, and high rates of subsequent pregnancies.
OBJECTIVE: Hysteroscopic removal of retained products of conception (RPOC) may allow complete removal of RPOC and decreased rates of intrauterine adhesions (IUA) when compared to the traditional blind curettage. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the current evidence regarding the use of hysteroscopy for treatment of RPOC. STUDY DESIGN: A literature search was conducted in December 2012 using MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials. The study selection criteria were use of the standard hysteroscopic technique for removal of RPOC in 5 or more cases, in any study design. We reviewed 11 studies, of which 5 retrospective studies met the selection criteria (comprising 326 cases). The rates of incomplete RPOC removal, surgical complications, post-operative IUA and subsequent pregnancies were abstracted and weighted events rates using a fixed meta-analysis model were calculated. RESULTS: Only one study compared the rates of IUA following hysteroscopy and curettage, precluding a meta-analysis comparison of the two techniques. There were no cases of incomplete RPOC removal. Three perioperative complications occurred (uterine perforation, infection, and vaginal bleeding). IUA on follow-up hysteroscopy were found in 4/96 women (weighted rate of 5.7%, 95% CI 2.4%, 13.0%). Of the 120 women desiring a subsequent pregnancy 91 conceived (weighted rate of 75.3%, 95% CI 66.7%, 82.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The lack of traditional curettage comparison groups in most studies precludes the conclusion that hysteroscopy is superior to traditional curettage, but this procedure does appear to have low complication rates, low rates of IUA, and high rates of subsequent pregnancies.