N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index
Pasquale DE FRANCISCIS 1, Flavio GRAUSO 1, Enrico M. MESSALLI 1, Maria T. SCHETTINO 1, Gloria CALAGNA 2, Antonino PERINO 2, Nicola COLACURCI 1, Marco TORELLA 1
1 Department of Woman, Child of General and Specialist Surgery, Second University of Naples, Napoli, Italy; 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecolgy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
BACKGROUND: To compare resectoscopic and small-diameter hysteroscopic techniques for endometrial polypectomy in patients with “unfavorable” cervix.
METHODS: Eighty women with a single 2-4 cm sized endometrial polyp, with unfavorable cervical anatomical conditions were enrolled in the study. Forty patients were treated with a 26F resectoscope requiring cervical dilatation (group A), forty patients were treated with a 5-mm hysteroscope requiring vaginoscopic approach (group B). Operative time, fluid absorption, complications, instrument failure, postoperative pain, overnight stay were analyzed. Operative visualization, operative difficulty and overall surgeon’s satisfaction were assessed with a visual analogue scale.
RESULTS: Operative time was significantly longer in group A than in group B (18.3±7.4 vs 11.3±5.2 minutes), the cumulative complication rate and the need of post-operative analgesics were higher in group A than in group B. Visual analogue scale of surgical difficulty and surgeon’s satisfaction were higher in group B than in group A.
CONCLUSIONS: The small-diameter hysteroscopy is a safe and effective approach for endometrial polyp up to 4 cm in patients with unfavorable cervical canal at risk of cervical injury.