Office hysteroscopy

Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 276-289

  Valle, Rafael F ^a,b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Prentice Women's Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOMYOSIS; ADNEXA DISEASE; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; ENDOMETRIUM BIOPSY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYSTEROGRAPHY; HYSTEROSCOPY; INSTRUMENTATION; PARACERVICAL BLOCK; PATIENT SELECTION; TOPICAL ANESTHESIA; UTERUS BIOPSY; UTERUS BLEEDING; UTERUS MYOMA;

ALGORITHMS; AMBULATORY CARE; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTEROSCOPES; HYSTEROSCOPY; INSUFFLATION; OFFICE VISITS; PATIENT SELECTION; POLYPS; UTERINE DISEASES; UTERINE HEMORRHAGE;

EID: 0033371970     PISSN: 00099201     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00003081-199906000-00011     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Font-Sastre V, Carabias J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Pellicer A. Office hysteroscopy with small caliber instruments. Acta Eur Fertil. 1986;17:427-429.
2. Goldrath MH, Sherman AI. Office hysteroscopy and suction curettage: Can we eliminate the hospital diagnostic D&C. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;152:220-229.
3. Bibbo M, Kleuskens L, Azizi F, et al. Accuracy of three sampling techniques for the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasias. J Reprod Med. 1982;27:622-626.
4. Grimes DA. Diagnostic dilation and curettage: A reappraisal. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;142:1-6.
5. Stock RJ, Kanbour A. Prehysterectomy curettage. Obstet Gynecol. 1975;45:537-541.
6. Goldchmit ZK, Blickstein I, Caspi B, Dgani R. The accuracy of endometrial Pipelle sampling with and without sonographic measurement of endometrial thickness. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;82:727-730.
7. Rodriguez GC, Yakub N, King MD. A comparison of the Pipelle device and the Vabra aspiration as measured by endometrial denudation in hysterectomy specimens: The Pipelle device samples significantly less of the endometrial surface than the Vabra aspirator. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168:55-59.
8. Loffer FD. Hysteroscopy with selected endometrial sampling compared with D&C for abnormal uterine bleeding: The value of a negative hysteroscopic view. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;73:16-20.
9. Lerner JP, Timor-Trisch ID, Monteagudo A. Use of transvaginal sonography in the evaluation of endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol Survey. 1996; 51:718-725.
10. Towbin NA, Gviazda IM, March CM. Office hysteroscopy versus transvaginal ultrasonography in the evaluation of patients with excessive uterine bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174:1678-1682.
11. 2 in the uterine cavity for hysteroscopy. In: Siegler AM, Lindemann HJ, eds. Hysteroscopy: Principles and Practice. Philadelphia, PA: JB Lippincott Co., 1984:108-111.
12. Valle RF. Hysteroscopy for gynecologic diagnosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1983;26: 253-276.
13. Valle RF. Indications for hysteroscopy. In: Siegler AM, Lindemann HJ, eds. Hysteroscopy: Principles and Practice. Philadelphia, PA: JB Lippincott Co., 1986:21-24.
14. Wieser F, Kurz C, Wenzl R, Albrecht A, Huber JC, Nagele F. Atraumatic cervical passage at outpatient hysteroscopy. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:549-51.
15. Bayer JR, DeCherney AH. Clinical manifestations and treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. JAMA. 1993;269:1823-1828.
16. Valle RF. Hysteroscopic evaluation of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;153:521-526.
17. Gallinat A. The effect of carbon dioxide during hysteroscopy. In: van der Pas H, van Herendael B, van Lith D, et al, eds. Hysteroscopy. Hingham, MA: MTP Press Limited, 1983:19-27.
18. Valle RF. Future growth and development of hysteroscopy. In: DeCherney AH, ed. Hysteroscopy. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company. Obstet Clin North Amer. 1988;15:107-126.
19. Barbot J. Contact hysteroscopy: Another method of endoscopic examination of the uterine cavity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980; 136:721-726.
20. Englund SE, Ingelman-Sundberg A, Westin B. Hysteroscopy in diagnosis and treatment of uterine bleeding. Gynecologia. 1957; 143:217-222.