Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Efficacy and Acceptability of Office Hysteroscopy before Assisted Reproductive Technology

Kunur Shah, Vineet V Mishra, Rohina Aggarwal, Sumesh Choudhary, Smit B Solanki

Keywords : Gold standard, Numerical pain rating scale, Office hysteroscopy

Citation Information : Shah K, Mishra VV, Aggarwal R, Choudhary S, Solanki SB. Efficacy and Acceptability of Office Hysteroscopy before Assisted Reproductive Technology. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2021; 13 (3):142-145.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1895

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 09-09-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction: Hysteroscopic technique of diagnosis and treatment of intrauterine pathology without anesthesia has gained popularity over the last few years. Intrauterine pathologies are found to be present in a significant number of infertile patients. Structural abnormalities of the endometrial cavity may affect the reproductive outcome adversely, by interfering with implantation or causing spontaneous abortion. Therefore, exclusion of any intrauterine pathology becomes an important step in infertility work-up prior to IVF. Objectives: This study was aimed to estimate the safety, efficacy, and patients’ acceptability of office hysteroscopy (OH) for evaluating the uterine cavity in patients of infertility planned for in vitro fertilization. Materials and methods: This is a prospective observational study enrolling 147 women. All women who were planned for IVF and underwent hysteroscopy were included in the study, and their data were analyzed. Office hysteroscopy was done without anesthesia, and their pain was rated on a Numerical Pain Rating Scale. Results: Pain was evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 20. Mean age of total patients is 33.51 ± 1.89 years. The mean pain score immediately after the procedure was 2.84 ± 1.26, and after 15 minutes, it was 0.95 ± 1.20. Majority of the patients tolerated the procedure well. Conclusion: The possibility of doing office hysteroscopy on outpatient basis without anesthesia and accuracy in diagnosing intrauterine abnormalities makes it a gold standard procedure.


PDF Share
  1. Levi Setti PE, Colombo GV, Savasi V, et al. Implantation failure in assisted reproduction technology and a critical approach to treatment. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1034:184–199. DOI: 10.1196/annals.1335.021.
  2. Saravelos S, Cocksedge K, Li T. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2008;14(5):415–429. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmn018.
  3. El-Mazny A, Abou-Salem N, El-Sherbiny W. Outpatient hysteroscopy: a routine investigation before assisted reproductive techniques? Fertil Steril 2011;95(1):272–276. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.033.
  4. Preutthipan S, Linasmita V. A prospective comparative study between hysterosalpingography and hysteroscopy in the detection of intrauterine pathology in patients with infertility. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2003;29(1):33–37. DOI: 10.1046/j.1341-8076.2003.00068.x.
  5. Shalev J, Meizner I, Bar-Hava I, et al. Predictive value of transvaginal sonography performed before routine diagnostic hysteroscopy for evaluation of infertility. Fertil Steril 2000;73(2):412–417. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00533-6.
  6. Kim AH, McKay H, Keltz MD. Sonohysterographic screening before in vitro fertilization, Fertil Steril 1998;69(5):841–844. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00045-4.
  7. Bettocchi S, Ceci O, Nappi L, et al. Operative office hysteroscopy without anesthesia: analysis of 4863 cases performed with mechanical instruments. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004;11(1):59–61. DOI: 10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60012-6.
  8. Bozdag G, Aksan G, Esinler I, et al. What is the role of office hysteroscopy in women with failed IVF cycles? RBM Online 2008;17(3):410–415. DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60226-x.
  9. Diniz DB, DepesDde B, Pereira AM, et al. Pain evaluation in office hysteroscopy: comparison of two techniques. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2010;32(1):26–32. DOI: 10.1590/s0100-72032010000100005.
  10. Fonseca MF, Sessa FV, Resende JAD, et al. Identifying predictors of unacceptable pain at office hysteroscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014;21(4):586–591. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.12.118.
  11. Ahmad G, O'Flynn H, Attarbashi S, et al. Pain relief for outpatient hysteroscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;CD007710. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007710.pub2.
  12. Vinagre C, Mairos J, Di Martino, P. Hysteroscopic anesthesia: a new method of anesthesia in ambulatory hysteroscopy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Port 2013;7(4):3. http://www.fspog.com/pt/revistas/1-18-28/
  13. Skensved H. Hysteroscopically guided intramyometrial local anaesthesia – the focal local – for resection of endometrial polyps by vaginoscopic microhysteroscopy in postmenopausal women. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013;20(6):1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.08.373.
  14. Paulo AA, Solheiro MH, Paulo CO. Is pain better tolerated with mini-hysteroscopy than with conventional device? A systematic review and meta-analysis: Hysteroscopy scope size and pain. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015;292(5):987–994. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-015-3731-0.
  15. Angioli R, De CiccoNardone C, Plotti F, et al. Use of music to reduce anxiety during office hysteroscopy: prospective randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014;21(3):454–459. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.07.020.
  16. Carta G, Palermo P, Marinangeli F, et al. Waiting time and pain during office hysteroscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012;19(3):360–364. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.01.017.
  17. Kokanali MK, Cavkaytar S, Guzel AI, et al. Impact of preprocedural anxiety levels on pain perception in patients undergoing office hysteroscopy. J Chin Med Assoc 2014;77(9):477–481. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcma.2014.07.004.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.