Outpatient hysteroscopy findings in patients of childbearing age at the Hospital de Clínicas, San Lorenzo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30545/scientiamericana.2026.483Abstract
Introduction: Outpatient hysteroscopy is a key tool in modern gynecology because of its ability to directly evaluate the uterine cavity with less invasiveness, good safety, and high patient acceptance; it also facilitates timely diagnosis and the efficient use of hospital resources. Objective: To describe the indications, hysteroscopic findings, procedural success, tolerance, and presence of complications in women aged 20–45 years seen at the hysteroscopy clinic of the Hospital de Clínicas de San Lorenzo during 2024. Methodology: A descriptive, retrospective, cross-sectional study with non-probability sampling of consecutive cases. Two hundred and four patients with complete medical records and consent for the academic use of their data were included. Age, reason for indication, hysteroscopic findings, procedural outcome, complications, and tolerance were analyzed. Results: The mean age was 38 ± 6 years. The main indication was abnormal uterine bleeding (81.37%), followed by intrauterine foreign bodies (13.73%) and infertility (4.41%). The most common findings were polyps (28.43%) and fibroids (23.53%). Of the hysteroscopies, 73.53% were diagnostic and 26.47% therapeutic. The procedure was successful in 92.6% of cases, no complications were recorded, and tolerance was good in 83.33% of patients. Conclusion: Outpatient hysteroscopy is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated procedure with high diagnostic and therapeutic utility, especially in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding.
Downloads
References
Echeverri N, Timmons D, Palin H, Florez L, Ring S, Carugno J. Is it time to move the hysteroscopy out of the operating room? [30E]. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(1):59S. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000559022.05565.13
Orlando MS, Bradley DA. Implementation of office hysteroscopy for the evaluation and treatment of intrauterine pathology. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;140(3):499–513. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000004898
Nash R, Saidi S. Outpatient hysteroscopy: suitable for all? A retrospective cohort study of safety, success and acceptability in Australia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2024;64(5):475–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13816
Tarrie JE. Outpatient hysteroscopy for the management of intrauterine disorders: feasibility, effectiveness and safety for 3000 cases. World J Gynecol Womens Health. 2021;5(2). https://doi.org/10.33552/WJGWH.2021.05.000606
Torales J, Barrios I. Diseño de investigaciones: algoritmo de clasificación y características esenciales. Med Clin Soc. 2023;7(3):210–35. https://doi.org/10.52379/mcs.v7i3.349
Muñoz Navarro SR. How many subjects do I need to power my study? Medwave. 2014;14(6):e5995. https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.06.5995
Salazar-Jiménez C, Crespo-Zhindón EF, Pedraza-González LA, López-Jurado JC, Salazar-López-Ortiz CG. Hysteroscopic findings and intrauterine pathology treatment in Mexican infertile women. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2023;12(8):2321–6. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20232266
Salvi P, Aramandla S, Gaikwad V. The correlation of hysteroscopy and histopathology in evaluating abnormal uterine bleeding: observations from a tertiary care center. Cureus. 2024;16(8):e67807. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.67807
Lasmar RB, Dias R, Barrozo PRM, Oliveira MAP, Coutinho ESF, da Rosa DB. Prevalence of hysteroscopic findings and histologic diagnoses in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(6):1803–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.045
Kayataş S, Meseci E, Tosun OA, Arinkan SA, Uygur L, Api M. Experience of hysteroscopy indications and complications in 5,474 cases. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2014;41(4):451–4.
van Dongen H, de Kroon CD, Jacobi CE, Trimbos JB, Jansen FW. Diagnostic hysteroscopy in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2007;114(6):664–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01326.x
Epstein E, Ramirez A, Skoog L, Valentin L. Dilatation and curettage fails to detect most focal lesions in the uterine cavity in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001;80(12):1131–6. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.801210.x
Ribeiro CT, Rosa-e-Silva JC, Sá MFS, Rosa-e-Silva ACJS, Poli-Neto OB, Reis FJC, et al. Hysteroscopy as a standard procedure for assessing endometrial lesions among postmenopausal women. Sao Paulo Med J. 2007;125(6):338–42. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-31802007000600007
Yanar BA, Pek E, Ünsal M. Can hysteroscopy be substituted to hysterosalpingography in the assessment of infertility? Methods of showing tubal transition as hysteroscopic. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2022;49(1):14. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog4901014
Ray-Offor E, Nyengidiki TK. Diagnostic yield and therapeutic outcome of hysteroscopy in women with infertility in a referral clinical setting: a Port Harcourt, Nigeria experience. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;38:155. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2021.38.155.27101
Song D, Li TC, Zhang Y, Feng X, Xia E, Huang X, et al. Correlation between hysteroscopy findings and chronic endometritis. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(4):772–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.12.007
Farghali MM, Abdelazim IA, El-Ghazaly TE. Relation between chronic endometritis and recurrent miscarriage. Prz Menopauzalny. 2021;20(3):116–21. https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2021.109769
Mishra V, Aggarwal R, Solanki SB, Patel K. A retrospective analysis of 4800 office hysteroscopies at a single center. J South Asian Feder Obst Gynae. 2023;15(5):509–12. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2317
Lach A, Wilczak M, Malinger A, Nowak A, Piekarski P, Mruczyński A, et al. Assessment of pain complaints and perioperative and delayed complications of hysteroscopy performed under local anesthesia: a retrospective analysis. J Clin Med. 2025;14(16):5646. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165646
Biela M, Doniec J, Szafarowska M, Sobociński K, Kwiatkowski A, Kamiński P. Is every patient eligible to have an office hysteroscopy? A retrospective analysis of 1301 procedures. Videosurgery Miniinv. 2020;15(2):337–45. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.89609
Coimbra AC, Falcão V, Pinto PV, Cavaco-Gomes J, Ribeiro ASF, Martinho M. Predictive factors of tolerance in office hysteroscopy: a 3-year analysis from a tertiary center. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2023;45(1):38–42. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1764361
Marbin S, Báez A, Carugno J, Lindheim SR. Smooth operator: nonpharmacologic approaches for overcoming barriers to office hysteroscopy. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2025;80(5):307–14. https://doi.org/10.1097/OGX.0000000000001387
Cooper NA, Smith P, Khan KS, Clark TJ. Vaginoscopic approach to outpatient hysteroscopy: a systematic review of the effect on pain. BJOG. 2010;117(5):532–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02503.x
Etcheverry AK, Hillard M, Smotrich G, Cigna ST. What has been discovered since 2014 about pain mitigation in outpatient hysteroscopy without general anesthesia? [ID 1356]. Obstet Gynecol. 2025;145(6S):56S. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005917.091
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Liza Sanabria, Tulio Duarte, María de los Ángeles González, Nadua Maidana, Jazmín Barrios, Walberto Leiva, Glady Estigarribia, Patricia Ríos-Mujica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
