alexa Outpatient hysteroscopy: traditional versus the 'no-touch' technique
Reproductive Medicine

Reproductive Medicine

Gynecology & Obstetrics

Author(s): Sharma M, Taylor A, di Spiezio Sardo A, Buck L, Mastrogamvrakis G

Abstract Share this page

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether outpatient hysteroscopy using the 'no-touch' technique confers any advantages in terms of patient discomfort over the traditional technique.

DESIGN: Prospective randomised controlled study.

SETTING: Outpatient hysteroscopy clinic in a large university undergraduate teaching hospital.

POPULATION: All women referred for outpatient hysteroscopy in a 12-month period.

INTERVENTIONS: Women were randomised to undergo either traditional saline hysteroscopy requiring the use of a speculum and tenaculum, or a 'no-touch' vaginoscopic hysteroscopy which does not require a speculum or tenaculum. Each group was further subdivided to have hysteroscopy with either a 2.9-mm or 4-mm hysteroscope. Patients were asked to complete pre- and postprocedure questionnaires ranking pain scores.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The relative success of each of these techniques, requirement for local anaesthetic and pain scores at different times during the hysteroscopy were recorded at the end of the procedure. The time taken to carry out each procedure was also measured.

RESULTS: One hundred and twenty women were recruited in this study: 60 were randomised to traditional hysteroscopy and 60 to 'no-touch' hysteroscopy. The overall success rate for hysteroscopy was 99%. There was no significant difference in the requirement for local anaesthetic between the two groups, but those who underwent 'no-touch' hysteroscopy with a 2.9-mm hysteroscope had the lowest requirement of local anaesthetic (10% compared with 27% in the no-touch hysteroscopy with a 4-mm hysteroscope group). The time taken to perform hysteroscopy and biopsy was significantly shorter with 'no-touch' hysteroscopy (5.9 vs 7.8 min; difference 1.9, 95% CI 0.7-3.1). There were no differences in pain scores between the groups at different times during hysteroscopy.

CONCLUSIONS: 'No-touch' or vaginoscopic hysteroscopy is significantly faster to perform than the traditional technique. Although there was no difference in pain scores between the two techniques, local anaesthetic requirements were least in those who underwent 'no-touch' hysteroscopy with a narrow bore hysteroscope.

This article was published in BJOG and referenced in Gynecology & Obstetrics

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords