ClinicalTrials.gg
WithdrawnNCT03545945Updated Jun 18, 2021

Hysteroscopy in Chronic Anovulation

An interventional study of Additional office hysteroscopy and Endometrial biopsy in Chronic Anovulation, sponsored by University of South Florida. Withdrawn at 1 site in United States. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-06-18.

Sponsored by University of South Florida · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was withdrawn
Unable to enroll patients
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
0
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 45 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

Patients with chronic anovulation presenting to the IVF clinic for subfertility treatment are at increased risk of endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma.They are often subjected to endometrial biopsy to rule out any underlying changes such as endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma before commencing any further treatment. Literature shows that these group of patients have higher possibility of having underlying uterine abnormality (uterine polyp, fibroid, septum, or adhesion) and if we perform only endometrial biopsy, these structural abnormalities will remain undetected. And presence of uterine abnormalities lead to difficulty in implantation, which eventually leads to lower success rate of infertility treatment.

WE propose that performing simultaneous office hysteroscopy followed by endometrial biopsy in such patients will lead to higher detection of uterine structural abnormalities and obtaining endometrial tissue to rule out hyperplasia or carcinoma. The concern for clinicians at times is that performing both the procedures together will lead to higher pain perception during the procedure. But with the introduction of flexible hysteroscope which has a diameter of 3.5 mm we hypothesize that the pain of performing office hysteroscopy with endometrial biopsy and performing endometrial biopsy alone will be equivalent. Meanwhile, hysteroscopy will lead lead to detection of underlying uterine pathology and help us in taking directed biopsies.

Read the detailed description

Patients with subfertility due to hormonal disorders are at increased risk of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia . Such conditions are associated with chronic anovulation, obesity and/or hyperinsulinemia. Presumably, the mechanism relates to constant, unrelenting estrogen stimulation of the endometrium, predisposing to abnormal patterns of growth. Hence, patients with long standing anovulation presenting for infertility evaluation, are often subjected to endometrial biopsy to rule out any underlying hyperplasia or malignancy.

The polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most obvious and common condition associated with chronic anovulation. It is characterized by hyperandrogenism, ovulatory dysfunction, and polycystic ovarian morphologic features. Based on National Institutes of Health (i.e. hyperandrogenism plus ovulatory dysfunction), "classic" polycystic ovary syndrome affects 10% of women of reproductive age but the prevalence may be twice under the broader Rotterdam criteria . Women with PCOS are at increased risk of infertility, endometrial hyperplasia and cancer. The risk of endometrial cancer in a woman with PCOS is reported to be 2.7 times higher than someone without this syndrome. Other uncommon conditions associated with chronic anovulation are Cushing's syndrome, congenital adrenal hyperplasia secondary to 21 hydroxylase deficiency, thyroid or liver disorder leading to decreased clearance of estrogen from the body. Similarly, obese postmenopausal women are also at increased risk for developing endometrial cancer.

In these patients, elevated plasma levels of androgen precursors increase estrogen level through aromatization of androgens in adipose tissue. In addition, it has been seen that non cycling patients with grossly increased endometrial thickness (greater than 12 mm) are also at high risk of endometrial hyperplasia. So these are the indications, which warrants patients to undergo endometrial biopsy. Literature shows that the prevalence of minor intrauterine abnormalities identified at hysteroscopy in cases with a normal transvaginal sonography (TVS) can be as high as 20-40%. Similarly, the prevalence of unsuspected uterine cavity abnormalities, diagnosed in an unselected group of patients undergoing IVF can be 11%. In this study, they identified endometrial polyps in 6% women, submucous myomas in 1%, intrauterine adhesions (2%), and septa (2%) . Another study also reports 16% intracavitary lesion in patients with infertility. It has been seen that in an IVF population, obesity (BMI >30) is also an independent risk factor for developing endometrial polyps. The prevalence of polyps in patients with BMI > 30 is 52% as compared to 15% among patients with BMI \<30. Similarly, PCOS patients also show a higher incidence of endometrial polyp (29%) diagnosed by hysteroscopy as compared to the nonPCOS population and the presence of 2 or more such polyps is associated with significant premalignant or malignant condition. So, missing the diagnosis of polyps in PCOS patients renders them to higher risk of developing malignancy in future. With this background, an important clinical question is if it is clinically justified to combine office hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy as part of the comprehensive evaluation of these patients? It is possible that prompt diagnosis and treatment of these unsuspected uterine abnormalities could optimize the condition of the uterine environment and thereby the outcome of treatment.

In spite of all the advantages office hysteroscopy offers, one of the reasons for avoiding office hysteroscopy has been the apprehension that adding office hysteroscopy will lead to higher pain score. But based on our literature review we propose that adding flexible office hysteroscopy to endometrial biopsy will not lead to any increase in pain score. In routine practice, endometrial biopsy is usually performed with "Pipelle" and is a simple office procedure. It is an excellent tool for evaluating the histopathology of the endometrium. The mean pain score during endometrial biopsy is 3 in a VAS scale of 1-10 with only 6.7% patients reporting severe pain . In a more recent study, the pain score during endometrial biopsy has been reported to be 6.2, which is higher than the previous reports. Similarly, office hysteroscopy is also a simple procedure with high patient acceptability and safety. The pain score reported during office hysteroscopy using flexible scope range from 2.3 -3. During traditional hysteroscopy where speculum and tenaculum is used, the pain score has been reported to be as high as 5.3. In fact, a comparative study of endometrial biopsy and office hysteroscopy showed that the pain score is higher during endometrial biopsy (5.1) as compared to diagnostic hysteroscopy (2.7). Hence, it seems very reasonable to add office hysteroscopy to endometrial biopsy for patients undergoing endometrial evaluation. This combined approach will have better diagnostic yield without increasing the pain perception.

02

Conditions studied

  • Chronic Anovulation

Browse trials for

03

In context

Anovulation

75 studies on the registry are indexed under Anovulation; 7 are open to participants now.

Browse Anovulation studies →

Lead sponsor

University of South Florida is the lead sponsor of 340 studies on the registry; 65 are open to participants now.

Of its 17 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 4 (24%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 45 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

All consecutive reproductive age female patients (aged 15-45) presenting to IVF clinic for medically indicated endometrial for evaluation of endometrial pathology with ability to provide written .

Sub-fertile women presenting with history of chronic anovulation and in addition meets any one of the criteria mentioned below:

  1. Women with ≤ 3 menstrual cycle per year.
  2. Women with oligomenorrhea and >30.
  3. Women with oligomenorrhea and endometrial thickness >12 mm measured during transvaginal sonography -

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients unable to provide .
  2. Patients presenting to USF-IVF clinic for evaluation of infertility but endometrial is not deemed based on assessment by provider.
  3. Patients refusing participation in lieu of additional procedure.
  4. Patients are already known to have existing uterine abnormality diagnosed by ultrasound. -
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(4)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Biopsy and archival tissue

A biopsy takes a small piece of tissue to examine. “Archival tissue” is a sample already taken, for example at diagnosis, and kept by the hospital.

Whether a stored sample will do depends on when it was taken, how much there is and what the study needs. Ask whether the study accepts your stored sample or needs a new biopsy.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

BMI (body mass index)

Weight in kilograms divided by height in metres squared. Example: 70 kg and 1.75 m gives 70 ÷ (1.75 × 1.75) ≈ 22.9.

What counts as overweight or obesity differs between countries (some use lower cut-offs), so go by the range the study states.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
0 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Study arm

    Patients having office diagnostic hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy

    Procedure: Additional office hysteroscopy · Procedure: Endometrial biopsy

  • Other
    Control arm

    Patients having only endometrial biopsy

    Procedure: Endometrial biopsy

Interventions

  • ProcedureAdditional office hysteroscopy

    Patients in the study arm will undergo diagnostic office hysteroscopy where they look for any underlying polyp, fibroids or uterine anomaly in addition to endometrial biopsy.

  • ProcedureEndometrial biopsy

    Patients randomized to endometrial biopsy only group will be prepped with betadine solution and local anesthesia in the form of lidocaine gel placed in the external cervical canal and biopsy will be performed using a Pipelle catheter.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Detection of unsuspected underlying uterine abnormalities. (i.e. polyp, fibroids, septum and/or adhesion)

    The primary outcome of the study is to determine whether performing office hysteroscopy in addition to endometrial biopsy in subfertile patients who are at risk of endometrial hyperplasia or cancer, enhances the chances of detection of unsuspected underlying uterine abnormalities. (i.e. polyp, fibroids, septum and/or adhesion).

    Time frame: 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Pain score (evaluated on VAS scale)

    Our secondary outcome is to compare the pain score (evaluated on VAS scale) between patients who are having office hysteroscopy in addition to endometrial biopsy with patients who are having endometrial biopsy alone (VAS scale).

    Time frame: 1 year

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of South Florida, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
    Tampa, Florida 33606, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Klip H, Burger CW, Kenemans P, van Leeuwen FE. Cancer risk associated with subfertility and ovulation induction: a review. Cancer Causes Control. 2000 Apr;11(4):319-44. doi: 10.1023/a:1008921211309. PubMed 10843444 ↗
  • Legro RS. Diagnostic criteria in polycystic ovary syndrome. Semin Reprod Med. 2003 Aug;21(3):267-75. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-43304. PubMed 14593549 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 18, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03545945
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 4, 2018
Start date
Sep 1, 2018
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2020 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 1, 2021
Last update
Jun 18, 2021

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is withdrawn, as verified in Mar 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion