ArticleJAMA2023
Operative Hysteroscopy vs Vacuum Aspiration for Incomplete Spontaneous Abortion: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in JAMA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Assessment of the Effectiveness of Hysteroscopy in the Treatment of Intrauterine Trophoblastic Retentions
Comparison Of Surgical Management Of Early Pregnancy Loss By Suction Curettage Versus Hysteroscopy In Patients Undergoing In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF)
Evaluation of the Non-inferiority of Resorbable Gelatin Embolization Compared to Embolization Combined With Endometrial Aspiration for the Management of Hemorrhagic Uterine Vascular Abnormalities Following Premature Termination of Pregnancy
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Operative hysteroscopy vs vacuum aspiration for treatment of retained products of conception: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Effect of oliceridine on hypoxia during sedated hysteroscopy: a Phase 4 randomized clinical trial.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Voluntary interruption of pregnancy using hysteroresectoscopy: a mini-series of 15 cases.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- The paradox of early pregnancy care: Overtreatment amid systemic neglect.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Application of narrow-band imaging combined with hysteroscopic 7Fr cold knife in the treatment of missed early miscarriage.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Diagnostic dilemma in post-abortion intrauterine retention: endometrial polyps mimicking retained products of conception.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- The effect of artificial intelligence-empowered mobile health on psychological distress in women following abortion: protocol for a mixed-methods study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
- Case report: Magnetic resonance imaging findings of patients with diffuse uterine leiomyomatosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Operative hysteroscopy versus ultrasound-guided electric vacuum aspiration for removal of retained products of conception: A prospective cohort study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
- Incorrect Interquartile Ranges.JAMA · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Vacuum aspiration is commonly used to remove retained products of conception in patients with incomplete spontaneous abortion. Scarring of the uterine cavity may occur, potentially impairing future fertility. A procedural alternative, operative hysteroscopy, has gained popularity with a presumption of better future fertility. Objective: To assess the superiority of hysteroscopy to vacuum aspiration for subsequent pregnancy in patients with incomplete spontaneous abortion who intend to have future pregnancy. Design, Setting, and Participants: The HY-PER randomized, controlled, single-blind trial included 574 patients between November 6, 2014, and May 3, 2017, with a 2-year duration of follow-up. This multicenter trial recruited patients in 15 French hospitals. Individuals aged 18 to 44 years and planned for surgery for an incomplete spontaneous abortion with plans to subsequently conceive were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Interventions: Surgical treatment by hysteroscopy (n = 288) or vacuum aspiration (n = 286). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a pregnancy of at least 22 weeks' duration during 2-year follow-up. Results: The intention-to-treat analyses included 563 women (mean [SD] age, 32.6 [5.4] years). All aspiration procedures were completed. The hysteroscopic procedure could not be completed for 19 patients (7%), 18 of which were converted to vacuum aspiration (8 with inability to completely resect, 7 with insufficient visualization, 2 with anesthetic complications that required a shortened procedure, 1 with equipment failure). One hysteroscopy failed due to a false passage during cervical dilatation. During the 2-year follow-up, 177 patients (62.8%) in the hysteroscopy group and 190 (67.6%) in the vacuum aspiration (control) group achieved the primary outcome (difference, -4.8% [95% CI, -13% to 3.0%]; P = .23). The time-to-event analyses showed no statistically significant difference between groups for the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.07]). Duration of surgery and hospitalization were significantly longer for hysteroscopy. Rates of new miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, Clavien-Dindo surgical complications of grade 3 or above (requiring surgical, endoscopic, or radiological intervention or life-threatening event or death), and reinterventions to remove remaining products of conception did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Surgical management by hysteroscopy of incomplete spontaneous abortions in patients intending to conceive again was not associated with more subsequent births or a better safety profile than vacuum aspiration. Moreover, operative hysteroscopy was not feasible in all cases. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02201732.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.