Fluid deficit calculation at hysteroscopy: could consideration of intraperitoneal fluid accumulation add insight to safety limits?

IF 1 Q2 Medicine Minerva ginecologica Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-26 DOI:10.23736/S0026-4784.20.04640-7
Irene Peregrin-Alvarez, Robert Roman, Mary E Christiansen, Ginika Ikwuezunma, Laura Detti
{"title":"Fluid deficit calculation at hysteroscopy: could consideration of intraperitoneal fluid accumulation add insight to safety limits?","authors":"Irene Peregrin-Alvarez,&nbsp;Robert Roman,&nbsp;Mary E Christiansen,&nbsp;Ginika Ikwuezunma,&nbsp;Laura Detti","doi":"10.23736/S0026-4784.20.04640-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current literature and guidelines are largely silent regarding the contribution of the fallopian tubes to the fluid deficit (FD) during hysteroscopy. We explored whether the FD could be in part due to transtubal passage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective cohort study. Patients who underwent hysteroscopy because of benign gynecologic pathology with, or without, laparoscopy were enrolled. The fluid deficit and, in laparoscopic cases, the amount of fluid found in the pelvis were prospectively reported.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparisons between FD and intraperitoneal fluid were performed. Sixty-five patients were included in the study. Forty-five underwent hysteroscopy prior to laparoscopy and 20 patients underwent hysteroscopy-only. These were further divided into operative hysteroscopy and diagnostic hysteroscopy subgroups. In the laparoscopy group, the average FD was 525.9 mL (95% CI: 482.1-569.7) and the calculated FD due to intravasation was 286.6 mL (95%CI: 253.0-320.3). In the hysteroscopy without laparoscopy group, the average FD was 303.0 mL (95% CI: 85.2-520.8). There was no correlation between the intrauterine fluid pressure and the amount of FD, or the presence of intraperitoneal fluid.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most women with patent tubes undergoing hysteroscopy have accumulation of distention fluid in the pelvis and that the passage was not correlated with the intrauterine fluid pressure. These findings add new insight to the current guidelines, suggesting more accurate and patient-centered safety protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":18745,"journal":{"name":"Minerva ginecologica","volume":"72 6","pages":"420-424"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva ginecologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4784.20.04640-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The current literature and guidelines are largely silent regarding the contribution of the fallopian tubes to the fluid deficit (FD) during hysteroscopy. We explored whether the FD could be in part due to transtubal passage.

Methods: This was a prospective cohort study. Patients who underwent hysteroscopy because of benign gynecologic pathology with, or without, laparoscopy were enrolled. The fluid deficit and, in laparoscopic cases, the amount of fluid found in the pelvis were prospectively reported.

Results: Comparisons between FD and intraperitoneal fluid were performed. Sixty-five patients were included in the study. Forty-five underwent hysteroscopy prior to laparoscopy and 20 patients underwent hysteroscopy-only. These were further divided into operative hysteroscopy and diagnostic hysteroscopy subgroups. In the laparoscopy group, the average FD was 525.9 mL (95% CI: 482.1-569.7) and the calculated FD due to intravasation was 286.6 mL (95%CI: 253.0-320.3). In the hysteroscopy without laparoscopy group, the average FD was 303.0 mL (95% CI: 85.2-520.8). There was no correlation between the intrauterine fluid pressure and the amount of FD, or the presence of intraperitoneal fluid.

Conclusions: Most women with patent tubes undergoing hysteroscopy have accumulation of distention fluid in the pelvis and that the passage was not correlated with the intrauterine fluid pressure. These findings add new insight to the current guidelines, suggesting more accurate and patient-centered safety protocols.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宫腔镜下液体亏缺计算:能否考虑腹腔内积液增加对安全限度的认识?
背景:目前的文献和指南在很大程度上对宫腔镜下输卵管对液体不足(FD)的贡献保持沉默。我们探讨了FD是否部分是由经舌根通道引起的。方法:这是一项前瞻性队列研究。患者接受子宫镜检查,因为良性妇科病理,或不,腹腔镜检查。液体不足,在腹腔镜下的情况下,在骨盆中发现的液体量被前瞻性地报道。结果:FD与腹腔内液比较。65名患者参与了这项研究。45例患者在腹腔镜前行宫腔镜检查,20例仅行宫腔镜检查。进一步分为手术宫腔镜亚组和诊断宫腔镜亚组。腹腔镜组平均FD为525.9 mL (95%CI: 482.1 ~ 569.7),计算的内腔FD为286.6 mL (95%CI: 253.0 ~ 320.3)。无腹腔镜宫腔镜组平均FD为303.0 mL (95% CI: 85.2-520.8)。宫内液压与FD量或腹腔内液存在无相关性。结论:大多数宫腔镜下输卵管未闭的女性盆腔内存在积存的膨胀液,其通过与宫内液压无关。这些发现为当前的指导方针提供了新的见解,提出了更准确和以患者为中心的安全方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva ginecologica
Minerva ginecologica OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The journal Minerva Ginecologica publishes scientific papers on obstetrics and gynecology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of editorials, original articles, review articles, case reports, therapeutical notes, special articles and letters to the Editor. Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org). Articles not conforming to international standards will not be considered for acceptance.
期刊最新文献
Minilaparoscopy in gynecology: applications, benefits and limitations. Re-birth in a Covid hospital: a point of view. Endometriosis-associated infertility: surgery or IVF? Cesarean delivery: an evidence-based review on of the technique. Approaching ovarian endometrioma with medical therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1