[Analysis of 16 cases of uterine perforation during hysteroscopic electro-surgeries].

Objective: To analyse the cause, diagnosis, treatment and preventive methods of uterine perforation resulting from hysteroscopic electro-surgeries.

Methods: Data of cases with uterine perforation were collected from 5 hospitals where overall 3,541 hysteroscopic electro-surgeries were done from May 1990 to July 2002. There were 1 468 transcervical resections of endometrium (TCRE), 797 cases of transcervical resection of myoma (TCRM), 783 cases of transcervical resection of endometrial polyp (TCRP), 189 cases of transcervical resection of uterine septa (TCRS), 112 cases of transcervical resection of uterine adhesion (TCRA) and 192 cases of transcervical removal of foreign body (TCRF). All operations were performed under B-ultrasonographic or laparoscopic monitoring. Cervical dilator stick was inserted into cervical canal or 200 micro g of misoprostol put in the posterior fornix the evening before operation. The procedures were done according to different indications and purposes. Cases of uterine perforation were divided into two groups: caused by approaching (entry-related) and by surgical instruments (technique-related).

Results: Totally sixteen cases (0.45%) of uterine perforation occurred. Seven cases occurred during cervical dilatation and 1 during hysteroscopy inserting lentry-related. Eight cases were technique-related caused by electrode. The incidences of uterine perforation of different operations were: TCRA 4.46% (5/112), TCRF 3.12% (6/192), TCRE 0.27% (4/1 468), TCRM 0.13% (1/797). TCRP and TCRS none. These 16 cases were all diagnosed during operations. 10 cases (62%) by B ultrasound and (or) laparoscopy, 6 cases (38%) by hysteroscopy and clinical features. 13 cases were complete uterine perforations, among them 2 were diagnosed by laparoscopic monitoring, 5 by B-ultrasonic monitoring, 4 by hysteroscopy and 2 by symptoms and B-ultrasound, 3 cases were incomplete uterine perforations in which 2 were diagnosed by laparoscopic monitoring and one by B-ultrasound monitoring.

Conclusions: Half of uterine perforation cases were entry-related, so attention has to be paid to entry of Hegar or hysteroscopy (i.e., not dilate the cervix as possible and introduce the scope under direct vision). The other half were related to surgeons' experience and type of operation. TCRA and TCRF run more risks. B-ultrasound and (or) laparoscopy monitoring during hysteroscopic electro-surgery may help to prevent but not completely avoid uterine perforation.