To compare hysteroscopic morcellation with bipolar resectoscopy for removal of endometrial polyps, in terms of procedure time, peri- and postoperative adverse events, tissue availability, and short-term effectiveness.
Design
Multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).
Setting
Day surgery setting of a teaching and a university hospital.
Patients
Women with larger (≥1 cm) endometrial polyps.
Interventions
Hysteroscopic morcellation with the TRUCLEAR 8.0 Tissue Removal System or bipolar resectoscopy with a rigid 8.5-mm bipolar resectoscope.
Measurements and Main Results
Eighty-four women were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Median operating time was 4.0 min (range: 2.5–7.1) and 6.0 min (range: 3.8–11.7) in the hysteroscopic morcellation and resectoscopy groups, respectively. Operating time was reduced by 38% (95% confidence interval: 5%–60%; p = .028) in the hysteroscopic morcellation group. Procedure time, which was defined as the sum of the installation and operating time, tended to be less for the hysteroscopic morcellation group (median 9.5 min [range: 7.6–12.2] vs 12.2 min [range: 8.8–16.0]; p = .072). Perforation occurred at dilation or hysteroscope (re)introduction in 3 patients of the resectoscopy group, resulting in procedure discontinuation or prolongation of hospital stay. Perforation occurred at dilation in 1 patient in the hysteroscopic morcellation group; however, the procedure was successfully completed. Postoperatively, 2 patients of the hysteroscopic morcellation group were diagnosed with a urinary tract infection. Tissue was available for pathology analysis in all patients, except for 2 patients in the resectoscopy group in whom the procedure was discontinued due to perforation.
Conclusion
Hysteroscopic morcellation is a fast, effective, and safe alternative to bipolar resectoscopy for removal of endometrial polyps.
