1438 Experience with the Storz Trophyscope® Versus Cooper Surgical Endosee® for Office Diagnostic Hysteroscopy

Abstract

Study Objective Determine use patterns and success rates for office diagnostic hysteroscopy with the 2.9 mm Storz TROPHYSCOPE® and handheld portable Cooper Surgical Endosee device in a clinic setting. Design Prospective cohort study of a hysteroscopy quality improvement database. Setting Gynecology clinic in a tertiary care center. Patients or Participants Patients undergoing office hysteroscopy with either the Storz Trophyscope or Cooper Surgical Endosee device. Interventions Diagnostic office hysteroscopy. Measurements and Main Results Of the 172 office hysteroscopies, 78 utilized the Trophyscope, with 8 (10%) being inadequate, while 94 utilized Endosee, with 13 (14%) being inadequate (p=.64). Of the 13 inadequate Endosee hysteroscopies, 3 (23%) were due to visualization, 5 (39%) due to patient intolerance, 3 (23%) due to cervical stenosis, and 2 (15%) due to both patient intolerance and stenosis. Of the 8 inadequate Trophyscope hysteroscopies, 7 (87%) were due to patient intolerance and 1 (13%) to cervical stenosis (p=0.14). Of the 151 adequate office procedures performed, 52 cases underwent subsequent procedures in the operating room (OR) with hysteroscopy or hysterectomy (Table 1). Of these, 27 (84%) of 32 Endosee cases and 15 (75%) of 20 Trophyscope cases were in agreement with findings from the OR procedure (p=0.48). Conclusion There is no difference in adequate visualization or pathologic diagnoses with the Endosee and TrophyScope devices in this prospective cohort. Larger, adequately powered studies are needed to confirm the sensitivity and specificity for these newer, disposable office hysteroscopic devices. Determine use patterns and success rates for office diagnostic hysteroscopy with the 2.9 mm Storz TROPHYSCOPE® and handheld portable Cooper Surgical Endosee device in a clinic setting. Prospective cohort study of a hysteroscopy quality improvement database. Gynecology clinic in a tertiary care center. Patients undergoing office hysteroscopy with either the Storz Trophyscope or Cooper Surgical Endosee device. Diagnostic office hysteroscopy. Of the 172 office hysteroscopies, 78 utilized the Trophyscope, with 8 (10%) being inadequate, while 94 utilized Endosee, with 13 (14%) being inadequate (p=.64). Of the 13 inadequate Endosee hysteroscopies, 3 (23%) were due to visualization, 5 (39%) due to patient intolerance, 3 (23%) due to cervical stenosis, and 2 (15%) due to both patient intolerance and stenosis. Of the 8 inadequate Trophyscope hysteroscopies, 7 (87%) were due to patient intolerance and 1 (13%) to cervical stenosis (p=0.14). Of the 151 adequate office procedures performed, 52 cases underwent subsequent procedures in the operating room (OR) with hysteroscopy or hysterectomy (Table 1). Of these, 27 (84%) of 32 Endosee cases and 15 (75%) of 20 Trophyscope cases were in agreement with findings from the OR procedure (p=0.48). There is no difference in adequate visualization or pathologic diagnoses with the Endosee and TrophyScope devices in this prospective cohort. Larger, adequately powered studies are needed to confirm the sensitivity and specificity for these newer, disposable office hysteroscopic devices.