Saline contrast sonohysterography and directed extraction, resection and biopsy of intrauterine pathology using a Uterine Explora Curette

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 202-205

  Wei, A Y ^a   Schink, J C ^a   Pritts, E A ^a   Olive, D L ^a   Lindheim, S R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Directed biopsy; Extraction; Saline contrast sonohysterography; Uterine Explora Curette; Uterine pathology

Indexed keywords

ECHO CONTRAST MEDIUM; SODIUM CHLORIDE;

ARTICLE; BIOPSY DEVICE; BLEEDING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ENDOMETRIUM BIOPSY; ENDOMETRIUM POLYP; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HYSTEROGRAPHY; HYSTEROSCOPY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; POSTMENOPAUSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPONTANEOUS ABORTION; TREATMENT DURATION; UTERUS SYNECHIA;

ABORTION, HABITUAL; BIOPSY; CONTRAST MEDIA; DILATATION AND CURETTAGE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTEROSCOPY; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; POSTMENOPAUSE; SODIUM CHLORIDE; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; UTERINE HEMORRHAGE;

EID: 33646684258     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: 14690705     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/uog.2599     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Nannini R, Chelo E, Branconi F, Tantini C, Scarselli GF. Dynamic echohysteroscopy: a new diagnostic technique in the study of female infertility. Acta Eur Fertil 1981; 12: 165-171.
2. Lindheim SR, Adsuar N, Kushner DM, Pritts EA, Olive DL. Sonohysterography: A valuable tool in evaluating the female pelvis. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2003; 58: 770-784.
3. Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Serra V, Sampaio M, Pellicer A. An assessment of hysterosalpingography as a diagnostic tool for uterine cavity defects and tubal patency. J Clin Ultrasound 1992; 20: 87-95.
4. Parsons AK, Lense JJ. Sonohysterography for endometrial abnormalities: Preliminary results. J Clin Ultrasound 1992; 20: 175-181.
5. Romano F, Cicinelli E, Anastasio PS, Epifani S, Fanelli F, Galantino P. Sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy for diagnosing endouterine abnormalities in fertile women. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1994; 45: 253-260.
6. Keltz MD, Olive DL, Kim AH, Arici A. Sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy for screening in recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 670-674.
7. Coccia ME, Becattini C, Bracco GL, Bargelli G, Scarselli G. Intraoperative ultrasound guidance for operative hysteroscopy: a prospective study. J Reprod Med 2000; 45: 413-418.
8. Letterie GS. Ultrasound guidance during endoscopic procedures. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1999; 26: 63-82.
9. Timor-Tritsch IE, Masch RJ, Goldstein SR, Ng E, Monteagudo A. Transvaginal ultrasound-assisted gynecologic surgery: evaluation of a new device to improve safety of intrauterine surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 1074-1079.
10. Lindheim SR, Cohen MA, Sauer MV. Intra-operative applications of saline infusion ultrasonography. J Assist Reprod Genet 1999; 16: 390-394.
11. Lindheim SR, Morales AJ. Operative ultrasound using an echogenic loop snare for intrauterine pathology. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2003; 10: 107-110.
12. Session DR, Lerner JP, Tchen CK, Kelly AC. Ultrasound-guided fallopian tube cannulation using Albunex. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 972-974.
13. Bernard JP, Metzger U, Camatte S, Robin F, Vilde F, Taurelle R, Lecru F. Comparison of three catheters for endometrial sampling during sonohysterography: results of preliminary study. J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 22: 84-85.
14. Rodriquez GC, Yaqub N, King ME. A comparison of the pipelle device and the Vabra Aspirator as measured by endometrial denodation 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.
15. Widrich T, Bradley LD, Mitchinson AR, Collins RL. Comparison of saline infusion sonography with office hysteroscopy for the evaluation of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1327-1334.
16. Lindheim SR, Morales AJ. Comparisons of sonohysterography to hysteroscopy: Lessons learned and avoiding pitfalls. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2002; 9: 223-231.
17. Dubinsky TJ, Reed S, Mao C, Waitches GM, Hoffer EK. Hysterosonographically guided endometrial biopsy: technical feasibility. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174: 1589-1591.
18. Agostini A, Cravello L, Rojat-Habib Mc, Amabile-Boulat J, Roger V, Bretelle F, Blanc B. Evaluation of two methods for endometrial sampling during diagnostic hysteroscopy. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1999; 28: 433-438.