Does "no-touch" technique hysteroscopy increase the risk of infection?

IF 1.3 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Pub Date : 2022-06-27 DOI:10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272
Evrim Ebru Kovalak
{"title":"Does \"no-touch\" technique hysteroscopy increase the risk of infection?","authors":"Evrim Ebru Kovalak","doi":"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Today, thanks to its many advantages, hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach (no-touch) is increasingly being used more in outpatient diagnoses and treatments. However, there are concerns that the \"no-touch\" technique increases ascending genital tract infections since a speculum is not inserted, and disinfection of the cervix cannot achieve.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Between 2011 and 2017, 302 patients who underwent office hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach (group 1) and 254 patients who underwent hysteroscopy with the standard method under anesthesia in the operating room (group 2) were compared in terms of early complications (within two weeks postoperatively). The primary outcome was early postoperative infection, and the secondary outcome was other early complications, such as bleeding and rupture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, the success rate of hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach was 96.4%. According to the visual analog scale scoring system, 88.7% of the patients described mild-to-moderate pain. When group 1 and 2 were compared in terms of postoperative infection (3% and 2.4%, respectively) and other early complication rates (0% and 0.8%, respectively), no statistically significant difference was found (p>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach continues to be the gold standard method that is safe and well-tolerated by patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":45340,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","volume":"19 2","pages":"145-151"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/07/TJOG-19-145.PMC9249365.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2022.04272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Today, thanks to its many advantages, hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach (no-touch) is increasingly being used more in outpatient diagnoses and treatments. However, there are concerns that the "no-touch" technique increases ascending genital tract infections since a speculum is not inserted, and disinfection of the cervix cannot achieve.

Materials and methods: Between 2011 and 2017, 302 patients who underwent office hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach (group 1) and 254 patients who underwent hysteroscopy with the standard method under anesthesia in the operating room (group 2) were compared in terms of early complications (within two weeks postoperatively). The primary outcome was early postoperative infection, and the secondary outcome was other early complications, such as bleeding and rupture.

Results: In this study, the success rate of hysteroscopy with the vaginoscopic approach was 96.4%. According to the visual analog scale scoring system, 88.7% of the patients described mild-to-moderate pain. When group 1 and 2 were compared in terms of postoperative infection (3% and 2.4%, respectively) and other early complication rates (0% and 0.8%, respectively), no statistically significant difference was found (p>0.05).

Conclusion: Hysteroscopy with a vaginoscopic approach continues to be the gold standard method that is safe and well-tolerated by patients.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
“无接触”技术宫腔镜会增加感染的风险吗?
目的:今天,由于其许多优点,宫腔镜结合阴道镜检查(无接触)越来越多地用于门诊诊断和治疗。然而,有人担心“无接触”技术会增加上行生殖道感染,因为没有插入窥器,而且无法对子宫颈进行消毒。材料与方法:比较2011年至2017年,302例经阴道镜入路宫腔镜患者(第一组)和254例经麻醉后在手术室采用标准方法宫腔镜患者(第二组)的早期并发症(术后2周内)。主要结局是术后早期感染,次要结局是其他早期并发症,如出血和破裂。结果:本研究经阴道镜入路宫腔镜手术成功率为96.4%。根据视觉模拟量表评分系统,88.7%的患者描述为轻度至中度疼痛。比较1组和2组术后感染发生率(分别为3%和2.4%)和其他早期并发症发生率(分别为0%和0.8%),差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。结论:宫腔镜联合阴道镜入路仍然是安全且患者耐受良好的金标准方法。
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Comparison of asprosin immunoreactivity in endometrial hyperplasia and grade-1 endometrial adenocarcinoma: A retrospective case-control study. Comparison of survival and apoptosis parameters of ovarian tissue follicles in two vitrification methods of needle-immersion and cryo-support in cancer patients. The impact of human papillomavirus positivity and genotype on sexual dysfunction and psychosexual stress. Antimicrobial resistance and multidrug resistance patterns of uropathogens isolated from pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria. Secretome improves anti-Müllerian hormone level and ovarian function in a premature ovarian insufficiency mice model.
×
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:604180095
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