de Codt Matthieu, Balza Claire, Jadoul Pascale, Forget Patrice, Squifflet Jean-Luc, Bernard Pierre, Luyckx Mathieu
Department of Gynecology and Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Clinical Chair in Anaesthesia, University of Aberdeen, Honorary Consultant, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Front Surg. 2020 Sep 8;7:64. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064. eCollection 2020.
To evaluate the feasibility of hysteroscopic resection (HsR) for primary surgical management of missed abortion. Reproductive outcomes and potential benefit of this technique will be compared to traditional dilatation and curettage (D&C). Retrospective cohort study in two Departments (Gynecology and Obstetrics) of a tertiary medical care center (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). Women with first trimester missed abortion. Two techniques were used for the management of missed abortion: ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage (D&C) and hysteroscopic resection (HsR). We evaluated 358 patients who underwent primary surgical removal of missed abortion. Hundred seventy three patients have been treated by D&C and 185 underwent HsR. In the HsR group, 110 patients (59.5%) have obtained their pregnancy with fertilization (IVF) vs. 7 patients (4.0%) in the D&C group which make the HsR population hypofertile in comparison to the D&C population. The intra- and post-operative complication rates are low and comparable. Intrauterine anomalies were diagnosed during the HsR in 10 patients (5.4%) and could be investigated after the intervention as a possible cause of miscarriage. Because of the difference in term of fertility, the reproductive outcomes have been analyzed by multivariate analysis. The hazard ratio of pregnancy at 6 months, adjusted to the factor IVF for D&C compared to HsR is 0.69 [0.49-0.96] ( = 0.026). That could represent a significant benefit in the particular population followed in IVF, but regarding the retrospective analysis, and the very different population in the two groups, it doesn't allow us to draw any evidence based conclusion. Hysteroscopic resection is a feasible and safe procedure for the management of missed abortion that could increase the diagnosis of uterine abnormalities. With all the limitation of the design of our study, our data seems to show a trend to a potential benefit in term of reproductive outcomes for hypofertile patient undergoing IVF treatment.
评估宫腔镜切除术(HsR)用于稽留流产一期手术治疗的可行性。将该技术的生殖结局和潜在益处与传统的刮宫术(D&C)进行比较。在一家三级医疗中心的两个科室(妇产科)进行回顾性队列研究(加拿大工作组分类II-2)。纳入孕早期稽留流产的女性。采用两种技术处理稽留流产:超声引导下刮宫术(D&C)和宫腔镜切除术(HsR)。我们评估了358例行稽留流产一期手术清除的患者。173例患者接受了刮宫术治疗,185例接受了宫腔镜切除术。在宫腔镜切除术组中,110例患者(59.5%)通过体外受精(IVF)成功受孕,而刮宫术组为7例患者(4.0%),这使得宫腔镜切除术组患者与刮宫术组相比生育力较低。术中及术后并发症发生率较低且相当。在宫腔镜切除术中,10例患者(5.4%)被诊断出子宫内异常,干预后可作为流产的可能原因进行调查。由于生育力方面的差异,通过多因素分析对生殖结局进行了分析。与宫腔镜切除术相比,刮宫术组在调整了体外受精因素后的6个月妊娠风险比为0.69[0.49-0.96](P = 0.026)。这可能对接受体外受精治疗的特定人群具有显著益处,但考虑到回顾性分析以及两组人群差异极大,我们无法得出任何基于证据的结论。宫腔镜切除术是一种用于治疗稽留流产的可行且安全的手术方法,可增加子宫异常的诊断。尽管我们的研究设计存在所有局限性,但我们的数据似乎显示出对于接受体外受精治疗的生育力低下患者,在生殖结局方面有潜在益处的趋势。