ArticleBMC women's health2026
Fluid deficit-related complications in hysteroscopic surgery using normal saline as distension medium: a retrospective analysis of four surgical modalities and risk factors.
Article in BMC women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare fluid deficit volumes across four hysteroscopic procedures using normal saline as distension medium, identify risk factors for excessive fluid deficit, and evaluate the impact of intrauterine pressure settings on fluid-related complications.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingDepartment of Day Care, Gansu Provincial Maternity and Child-care Hospital (Gansu Provincial Central Hospital), a tertiary referral center.
participantsA total of 422 patients underwent hysteroscopic surgery for intrauterine lesions between January 2022 and January 2025, including 62 transcervical resection of adhesions (TCRA), 170 hysteroscopic endometrial resection (HER), 80 transcervical resection of septum (TCRS), and 110 transcervical resection of myoma (TCRM) procedures.
interventionsAll procedures were performed using normal saline as distension medium. Intrauterine pressure was set at either 80 mmHg or 100 mmHg at the surgeon's discretion.
resultsThe primary outcome was distension fluid deficit volume. TCRM had the highest median absorption (700.0 mL, IQR 580-800) compared with TCRA (156.8 mL), HER (312.4 mL), and TCRS (278.5 mL) (P < 0.001). Fluid overload events (pulmonary edema or ICU admission) occurred exclusively in the TCRM group (5/110, 4.5%, P = 0.005). Exploratory ROC analysis suggested a candidate threshold of 750 mL for predicting fluid-related adverse events (AUC 0.741, 95% CI 0.641-0.842). However, given the limited number of fluid-related adverse events, a clinically relevant threshold of 1000 mL was used for the primary risk factor analysis. Multivariable logistic regression identified FIGO type 2 myoma (OR 3.60, 95% CI 1.01-12.81), operating time ≥ 60 min (OR 6.42, 95% CI 1.64-25.12), and distension pressure 100 mmHg (OR 4.64, 95% CI 1.32-16.32) were associated with excessive absorption in this exploratory analysis. However, the non-randomized assignment of pressure limits causal interpretation, and these findings require prospective validation.
conclusionTranscervical resection of myoma (TCRM) is associated with the highest risk of fluid deficit among hysteroscopic procedures performed with normal saline. FIGO type 2 myoma, prolonged operative time, and higher distension pressure (100 mmHg) are independent predictors of excessive fluid deficit. These findings support the use of lower intrauterine pressure (80 mmHg) as a safe and cautious initial approach during TCRM. The candidate threshold for excessive fluid deficit identified in this study requires prospective validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42482225What 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.