The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2026
A retrospective comparison of hysteroscopic resection and curettage in the treatment of retained products of conception: surgical and reproductive outcomes.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coban Gulnur, Biber Ak Ayşe Yaren, Ozdemir Ayse Zehra, Coban Enes Furkan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and reproductive outcomes of hysteroscopic resection versus conventional dilation and curettage (D&C) in the management of retained products of conception (RPOC) following delivery or abortion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 55 patients diagnosed with RPOC at a tertiary care center between January 2015 and December 2025. The surgical intervention selected for each patient was determined by clinical indications, with either hysteroscopic resection or dilation and curettage (D&C) being the preferred option. The diagnosis was confirmed by transvaginal ultrasonography and histopathological examination. A comprehensive analysis encompassing demographic characteristics, clinical manifestations, surgical outcomes, and fertility outcomes was conducted between the two groups.
RESULTS: Hysteroscopy was performed in 28 patients (50.9%). D&C was performed in 27 patients (49.1%). The median time from pregnancy termination to intervention was significantly longer in the hysteroscopy group (28 vs. 7.5 days; p = 0.036). Residual tissue size and operative time were also significantly greater in the hysteroscopy group (p = 0.017 and p < 0.001, respectively). Although not statistically significant, time to conception was shorter in the hysteroscopy group (5 vs. 9.4 months), and the rate of pregnancy desire was significantly higher (82.1% vs. 66.7%; p = 0.021). Pregnancy was observed to be more prevalent in the D&C group during the follow-up period. However, this difference did not attain statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopy and dilation and curettage (D&C) have been demonstrated to be both effective and safe options for RPOC. The use of hysteroscopy, with its capacity for direct visualization and targeted removal, is supported by its efficacy in precise intrauterine assessment. The fertility outcomes observed in this cohort were comparable between the study groups.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 55 patients diagnosed with RPOC at a tertiary care center between January 2015 and December 2025. The surgical intervention selected for each patient was determined by clinical indications, with either hysteroscopic resection or dilation and curettage (D&C) being the preferred option. The diagnosis was confirmed by transvaginal ultrasonography and histopathological examination. A comprehensive analysis encompassing demographic characteristics, clinical manifestations, surgical outcomes, and fertility outcomes was conducted between the two groups.
RESULTS: Hysteroscopy was performed in 28 patients (50.9%). D&C was performed in 27 patients (49.1%). The median time from pregnancy termination to intervention was significantly longer in the hysteroscopy group (28 vs. 7.5 days; p = 0.036). Residual tissue size and operative time were also significantly greater in the hysteroscopy group (p = 0.017 and p < 0.001, respectively). Although not statistically significant, time to conception was shorter in the hysteroscopy group (5 vs. 9.4 months), and the rate of pregnancy desire was significantly higher (82.1% vs. 66.7%; p = 0.021). Pregnancy was observed to be more prevalent in the D&C group during the follow-up period. However, this difference did not attain statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopy and dilation and curettage (D&C) have been demonstrated to be both effective and safe options for RPOC. The use of hysteroscopy, with its capacity for direct visualization and targeted removal, is supported by its efficacy in precise intrauterine assessment. The fertility outcomes observed in this cohort were comparable between the study groups.