Hysteroscopic Morcellator Versus Electrosurgical Resection for Submucosal Leiomyoma
A Randomised Controlled Trial of Hysteroscopic Morcellation Versus Electrosurgical Resection for Submucosal Leiomyomas in Women With Abnormal Uterine Bleeding
GRACE Unit - School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW Sydney, Australia
162 participants
Jun 14, 2016
Interventional
Conditions
Summary
One of the most common reasons for presentation to a gynaecologist is for abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). Women suspected for leiomyomas clinically or on ultrasound evidence are likely to be recommended to have surgical treatment for their condition, since medical treatment is ineffective for this presentation. Monopolar electrosurgical resection is frequently used in hysteroscopic removal of fibroids. Main complications include electrolyte disturbances and potential fatal outcomes due to use of hypotonic, non-conductive media (glycine) for uterine distension; and need for removal of the hysteroscope mid-procedure in order to clear the intrauterine cavity of debris, increasing operating time and potentiates cervical trauma. The hysteroscopic morcellator (Myosure (registered trademark)) has become an increasingly used tool to remove submucosal leiomyomas, as well as other intra-uterine pathology such as retained placental remnants. This instrument operates in a normal saline medium, removing the risk of hyponatraemia second to excessive absorption, during mechanical resection and concurrent removal of the fibroid from the intra-uterine cavity. Risk to the patient of fluid overload due to intra-vascular or intra-peritoneal absorption of large quantities of saline may occur. This study will compare the use of a mechanical hysteroscopic morcellator to monopolar electrosurgical hysteroscopic resection to remove submucosal leiomyomas in symptomatic women with AUB-L. We hypothesise that the hysteroscopic morcellator will allow for significantly faster resection of fibroids independent of surgical skill. The primary outcome of the study will investigate cost minimisation of the two different devices in an operating room setting, and determine opportunities for direct and indirect savings in a public health setting. Secondary outcomes will include determining: (1) ease of use of device; (2) completeness of resection, in terms of cessation of operation due to fluid deficit point being reached; and (3) the number of adverse events. This study is a prospective, randomised, single-blinded multi-centre clinical study. Women will be randomised to one of two study groups: 1. Intervention group: Resection of the leiomyoma with the hysteroscopic morcellator (Myosure (registered trademark)) and a normal saline distension medium. 2. Control group: Resection of the leiomyoma with a monopolar electrosurgical hysteroscopic resector with a glycine distension medium. Randomisation will occur via a third-party randomisation service, and study participants only will be blinded with regards to group allocation. A minimum of 162 participants to be enrolled over a 1-year recruitment period. All cases must satisfy the inclusion/exclusion criteria and will be followed for a minimum of 6 months after surgery.
Eligibility
Plain Language Summary
Simplified for easier understanding
This summary was AI-generated to explain the trial in plain language. It is not medical advice. Always discuss eligibility with your doctor before enrolling in a clinical trial.
Interested in this trial?
Get notified about updates and connect with the research team.
Interventions
Hysteroscopic Morcellation The MyoSure (Registered Trademark) is a 2nd-generation hysteroscopic morcellation device. It aims to remove leiomyomas in one single insertion of a hysteroscope into the uterus . The device uses suction-based, mechanical energy to rotate a morcellating system and concurrently aspirate tissue strips. The uterus is distended with saline via a small channel in the hysteroscope. This procedure, performed by the surgeon (consultant or supervised trainee), is intended to reduce risks of (1) traumatic injury to uterus and inadvertent fluid overload compared to traditional procedures, by reducing operation time; (2) thermal injury compared to thermal ablation techniques. Duration of this procedure is between 10 to 60 minutes.
Locations(3)
View Full Details on ANZCTR
For the most up-to-date information, visit the official listing.
ACTRN12616001404415