Steffi van Wessel1, Nele Coryn2, Hubertus van Vliet2, Benedictus Schoot2, Steven Weyers2, Tjalina Hamerlynck2. 1. Women's Clinic, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (Drs. van Wessel, Coryn, Schoot, Weyers, and Hamerlynck); Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (Drs. van Vliet and Schoot). Electronic address: steffi.vanwessel@ugent.be. 2. Women's Clinic, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (Drs. van Wessel, Coryn, Schoot, Weyers, and Hamerlynck); Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (Drs. van Vliet and Schoot).
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reproductive outcomes in women treated for retained products of conception (RPOC) by hysteroscopy (morcellation vs loop resection). DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: A teaching and university hospital. PATIENTS: Patients included in a previous randomized controlled trial on hysteroscopic removal of RPOC comparing morcellation (n = 46) with loop resection (n = 40). INTERVENTIONS: Hysteroscopic morcellation versus loop resection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measures were live birth and pregnancy complications (including abnormal placentation [placenta accreta/increta/percreta], placenta previa, vasa previa, retained placenta after delivery or incomplete expulsion with the need for manual removal or curettage, and RPOC), uterine rupture, and other complications (blood loss, preterm labor, preterm premature rupture of membranes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and intrauterine growth restriction). The live birth rate was 88.9% in the morcellation group and 68.2% in the loop resection group (p = .09). Uterine rupture occurred in 1 patient in the morcellation group (4.2%) (p = 1.00). Placental complications were found in 20.8% and 22.2% of the hysteroscopic morcellation and loop resection groups, respectively (p = .33), and other pregnancy complications were seen in 33.3% and 16.6% of the 2 groups (p = .33). The secondary outcome was time to pregnancy. The median time to pregnancy was 14 weeks (interquartile range [IQR], 5-33 weeks) in the morcellation group and 15 weeks (IQR, 6-37 weeks) in the loop resection group (p = .96). CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopic removal of RPOC seems to have no detrimental effect on reproductive outcome and no significant effect on pregnancy rate.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reproductive outcomes in women treated for retained products of conception (RPOC) by hysteroscopy (morcellation vs loop resection). DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: A teaching and university hospital. PATIENTS: Patients included in a previous randomized controlled trial on hysteroscopic removal of RPOC comparing morcellation (n = 46) with loop resection (n = 40). INTERVENTIONS: Hysteroscopic morcellation versus loop resection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measures were live birth and pregnancy complications (including abnormal placentation [placenta accreta/increta/percreta], placenta previa, vasa previa, retained placenta after delivery or incomplete expulsion with the need for manual removal or curettage, and RPOC), uterine rupture, and other complications (blood loss, preterm labor, preterm premature rupture of membranes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and intrauterine growth restriction). The live birth rate was 88.9% in the morcellation group and 68.2% in the loop resection group (p = .09). Uterine rupture occurred in 1 patient in the morcellation group (4.2%) (p = 1.00). Placental complications were found in 20.8% and 22.2% of the hysteroscopic morcellation and loop resection groups, respectively (p = .33), and other pregnancy complications were seen in 33.3% and 16.6% of the 2 groups (p = .33). The secondary outcome was time to pregnancy. The median time to pregnancy was 14 weeks (interquartile range [IQR], 5-33 weeks) in the morcellation group and 15 weeks (IQR, 6-37 weeks) in the loop resection group (p = .96). CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopic removal of RPOC seems to have no detrimental effect on reproductive outcome and no significant effect on pregnancy rate.
Authors: M Franchini; O Ceci; P Casadio; J Carugno; G Giarrè; G Gubbini; U Catena; M Chiara de Angelis; A Di Spiezio Sardo Journal: Facts Views Vis Obgyn Date: 2021-06-10