Hysteroscopic Resection for Missed Abortion: Feasibility, Operative Technique and Potential Benefit Compared to Curettage

Matthieu de Codt; Claire Balza; Pascale Jadoul; Patrice Forget; Jean-Luc Squifflet; Pierre Bernard; Mathieu Luyckx

doi:10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064

Hysteroscopic Resection for Missed Abortion: Feasibility, Operative Technique and Potential Benefit Compared to Curettage

Matthieu de Codt, Claire Balza, Pascale Jadoul, Patrice Forget, Jean-Luc Squifflet, Pierre Bernard, Mathieu Luyckx

Applied Health Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: 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).Design: Retrospective cohort study in two Departments (Gynecology and Obstetrics) of a tertiary medical care center (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).Patients: Women with first trimester missed abortion.Intervention: Two techniques were used for the management of missed abortion: ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage (D&C) and hysteroscopic resection (HsR).Results: 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 in vitro 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] (p = 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.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.

Original language	English
Article number	64
Pages (from-to)	64
Number of pages	4
Journal	Frontiers in Surgery
Volume	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064
Publication status	Published - 8 Sept 2020

Bibliographical note

Data Availability Statement
All datasets presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material.

Keywords

missed abortion
management
curettage
hysteroscopic resection
reproductive outcomes
MANAGEMENT
ASHERMANS-SYNDROME
MISCARRIAGE
PREVALENCE

Access to Document

10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064Licence: CC BY

Codt_etal_fsurg_Hysteroscopic_VOR
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Final published version, 146 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{dc61bd46c7c44e85be4b628936cf1dd4,

title = "Hysteroscopic Resection for Missed Abortion: Feasibility, Operative Technique and Potential Benefit Compared to Curettage",

abstract = "Objective: 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).Design: Retrospective cohort study in two Departments (Gynecology and Obstetrics) of a tertiary medical care center (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).Patients: Women with first trimester missed abortion.Intervention: Two techniques were used for the management of missed abortion: ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage (D&C) and hysteroscopic resection (HsR).Results: 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 in vitro 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] (p = 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.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.",

keywords = "missed abortion, management, curettage, hysteroscopic resection, reproductive outcomes, MANAGEMENT, ASHERMANS-SYNDROME, MISCARRIAGE, PREVALENCE",

author = "{de Codt}, Matthieu and Claire Balza and Pascale Jadoul and Patrice Forget and Jean-Luc Squifflet and Pierre Bernard and Mathieu Luyckx",

note = "Data Availability Statement All datasets presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material.",

year = "2020",

month = sep,

day = "8",

doi = "10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064",

language = "English",

volume = "7",

pages = "64",

journal = "Frontiers in Surgery",

issn = "2296-875X",

publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hysteroscopic Resection for Missed Abortion

T2 - Feasibility, Operative Technique and Potential Benefit Compared to Curettage

AU - de Codt, Matthieu

AU - Balza, Claire

AU - Jadoul, Pascale

AU - Forget, Patrice

AU - Squifflet, Jean-Luc

AU - Bernard, Pierre

AU - Luyckx, Mathieu

N1 - Data Availability Statement All datasets presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material.

PY - 2020/9/8

Y1 - 2020/9/8

N2 - Objective: 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).Design: Retrospective cohort study in two Departments (Gynecology and Obstetrics) of a tertiary medical care center (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).Patients: Women with first trimester missed abortion.Intervention: Two techniques were used for the management of missed abortion: ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage (D&C) and hysteroscopic resection (HsR).Results: 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 in vitro 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] (p = 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.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.

AB - Objective: 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).Design: Retrospective cohort study in two Departments (Gynecology and Obstetrics) of a tertiary medical care center (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).Patients: Women with first trimester missed abortion.Intervention: Two techniques were used for the management of missed abortion: ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage (D&C) and hysteroscopic resection (HsR).Results: 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 in vitro 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] (p = 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.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.

KW - missed abortion

KW - management

KW - curettage

KW - hysteroscopic resection

KW - reproductive outcomes

KW - MANAGEMENT

KW - ASHERMANS-SYNDROME

KW - MISCARRIAGE

KW - PREVALENCE

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091444657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064

DO - 10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064

M3 - Article

C2 - 33102514

SN - 2296-875X

VL - 7

SP - 64

JO - Frontiers in Surgery

JF - Frontiers in Surgery

M1 - 64

ER -

Hysteroscopic Resection for Missed Abortion: Feasibility, Operative Technique and Potential Benefit Compared to Curettage

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this