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

Front Surg. 2020 Sep 8:7:64. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.00064. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Matthieu de Codt¹, Claire Balza¹, Pascale Jadoul¹, Patrice Forget², Jean-Luc Squifflet¹, Pierre Bernard³, Mathieu Luyckx¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Gynecology and Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
² Clinical Chair in Anaesthesia, University of Aberdeen, Honorary Consultant, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
³ Department of Obstetrics, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

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: curettage; hysteroscopic resection; management; missed abortion; reproductive outcomes.