Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 45709

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : November | Volume : 16 | Issue : 11 | Page : QC01 - QC04 Full Version

Prevalence of Endometrial Polyp by Office Hysteroscopy at a Tertiary Care Centre in Western Maharashtra: A Prospective Cohort Study

Published: November 1, 2022 | DOI:
Bidhan Roy, Aruna Menon, Soumen Das Poddar, Ritam Bhattacharya

1. Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 2. Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Command Hospital (SC), Pune, Maharashtra, India. 4. Clinical Tutor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Bidhan Roy,
Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India.


Introduction: Endometrial polyps occur in different reproductive age groups and make it a distinct pathological entity with diverse clinical manifestations.

Aim: To determine the prevalence of endometrial polyp detected by office hysteroscopy, among different cohorts of patients attending the Gynaecology outpatient department at a tertiary care centre in western Maharashtra, India.

Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted in women who underwent office hysteroscopy, in view of infertility and Abnormal Uterine Bleeding (AUB) at a tertiary care centre in western Maharashtra, India from November 2020 to October 2021. The study included a total of 227 patients which were divided into four cohorts of women namely, infertility patients (aged 25-35 years) (N=115), AUB patients (aged 40-44 years) (N=29), AUB patients (aged 45-50 years) (N=49) and in postmenopausal women (aged more than 51 years) (N=34). Results were expressed in terms of frequency and percentages.

Results: Endometrial polyp was detected among 45 patients (19.82%) out of a total 227 patients who underwent office hysteroscopy. The prevalence rate was 16 (13.9) among women with infertility, 5 (17.2) among 40-44 years old women with AUB, 15 (30.6) among 45-50 years old women with AUB and 9 (26.5) among postmenopausal women.

Conclusion: Endometrial polyp has a significant prevalence in patients with infertility as well as in patients with AUB. It can be easily detected by diagnostic office hysteroscopy, which should be included in the work-up of such patients.


Abnormal uterine bleeding, Female infertility, Postmenopausal women

An endometrial polyp is a hyperplastic growth containing disorganised endometrial glands, stroma, and blood vessels projecting from the basal endometrial lining of the uterus. Depending upon the population studied, the prevalence of endometrial polyp is reported to be between 7.8-34.9% (1). The reported prevalence of endometrial polyps in primary infertility ranged from 3.8-38.5%, and in secondary infertility from 1.8-17%, with a combined prevalence ranging from 1.9-24%. Endometrial polyp is also an important cause of AUB, accounting for 13-50% in premenopausal women with AUB and 30% in postmenopausal bleeding (2). Endometrial polyps may be grouped into either sessile or pedunculated and either as single or multiple in numbers. Polyps may be histologically classified as hyperplastic, atrophic, or functional.They may be symptomatic or asymptomatic (small polyps of <1 cm). Other polyps encountered in gynaecology include endocervical polyp and placental polyp. Endocervical polyps are an overgrowth of endocervical stroma covered by the epithelium. They appear as a single, red fleshy mass and are usually benign but may bleed on touch (3). Placental polyps are retained placental fragments, that undergo necrosis with fibrin deposition. They are at times the cause of frank secondary postpartum haemorrhage (4). The most common symptom arising out of endometrial polyp is usually AUB. Bleeding from an endometrial polyp takes place due to vascular fragility, chronic inflammation, and surface erosions of the polyps. Ischaemic necrosis may develop over the apex of large pedunculated polyps and may extend to the subsurface capillaries as a result of intermittent torsion and related thrombosis. But, it is seen that the size of the polyp, number of polyps, and the anatomical location of the polyp did not appear to correlate with bleeding symptoms (2). It has been seen that postmenopausal bleeding with an endometrial polyp or premenopausal women with AUB may harbour foci of atypia or malignancy in 1.5% of endometrial polyps (5).

Hysteroscopic evaluation and polypectomy have been recommended as the optimal mode of treatment for endometrial polyps (2). With the advent of smaller caliber flexible hysteroscopes, office hysteroscopy is an effective and safe diagnostic, and therapeutic intervention. It is minimally invasive and allows direct visualisation of the intrauterine pathology, without the need for general anaesthesia. Its diagnostic sensitivity and specificity is superior to Saline Infusion Sonography (SIS), Transvaginal Sonography (TVS) or Hysterosalpingography (HSG) (6),(7). Endometrial polyps are an important cause of uterine bleeding, and subfertility, and are possible precursors of malignancy. They are commonly encountered in different group of patients. The present study was carried out using office hysteroscopy, to highlight the prevalence of endometrial polyp among different cohorts of patients with gynaecological problems. The secondary objective was to determine the presence of uterine abnormalities other than polyps, like submucous fibroid, uterine septum etc, in the study group.

Material and Methods

A prospective cohort study was carried out in Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India, from November 2020 to October 2021. The study was initiated after the approval of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) (IRB/022/2020). It included 227 consecutive patients who had attended the Gynaecology Outpatient Department (OPD) within the duration of the study period.

Inclusion criteria: Patients with complaints of either AUB (intermenstrual bleeding or spotting, menorrhagia or polymenorrhoea) of three months duration or more, or inability to conceive (atleast 12 months duration) and had given their consent for office hysteroscopy as a part of evaluation were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Patients with diagnosed/suspected pregnancy, acute Pelvic Inflammatory Diseases (PID), and refusal to consent to the procedure were excluded from the study.

Study Procedure

The patients were divided into the infertility cohort (N=115) and the AUB cohort (N=112). The infertility cohort was subdivided into primary infertility (patients without any history of conception) (n=80) and secondary infertility (patients with a history of atleast one conception) (n=35).

The AUB cohort was divided on the basis of their age: AUB (40-44 years) (n=29), AUB (45-50 years) (n=49) and postmenopausal (>51 years) (n=34). Each of these age cohorts was further subdivided on the basis of parity: Nullipara, Primipara, and Multipara. The office hysteroscopy was performed using normal saline as the distension media and a 4 mm calibre hysteroscope, without using any speculum, vulsellum, cervical dilators, or preprocedural misoprostol. No preprocedure or postprocedure prophylactic antibiotics were given and there was no need for any infective endocarditis prophylaxis in any patients.

Statistical analysis

The data was analysed using Microsoft excel 2013 software and Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 21.0. Results were expressed in terms of frequency and percentages.


The overall prevalence of endometrial polyp in present study was 19.82% (45 out of 227 patients) (Table/Fig 1). The most common presenting complaint in the AUB group (40-44 years) and (45-50 years) was intermenstrual spotting (Table/Fig 2). The images of endometrial polyp in different age groups is shown in the (Table/Fig 3). The prevalence of endometrial polyp among the respective cohorts is as shown in (Table/Fig 4).

In the Infertility cohort, the prevalence was found to be 12.5% and 17.1%, respectively in the primary and secondary infertility subgroups (Table/Fig 5) and the overall prevalence was 13.91% with a mean age of 29.2 years (SD 3.2).

However, there was no significant association found between the presence of endometrial polyp and infertility (p-value-0.269) (p>0.05) (Table/Fig 5).

In the AUB cohort, the prevalence of endometrial polyp was 17.2% in the age group of 40-44 years, 30.6% in the age group of 45-50 years, and 26.5% in the postmenopausal age group of >51 years. There was a significant association between the presence of polyp and AUB (p-value=0.0257) (p-value <0.05). However, no association could be determined between parity and AUB within the individual cohorts because of the small sample sizes (Table/Fig 6).


The present study shows an overall incidence of polyp as 19.82%. The prevalence of endometrial polyp among women with infertility was 13.9%, AUB (40-44 years) was 17.2%, AUB (45-50 years) was 30.6% and Postmenopausal bleeding (>51 years) was 26.5%, respectively.

There was a significant variation in the prevalence of endometrial polyp in patients with infertility as shown in (Table/Fig 7), with the overall prevalence ranging from 3.5-9.89% (8),(9),(10),(11). In all these studies, the proportion of primary infertility patients was nearly twice of that of secondary infertility patients (thrice in the case of the study conducted by Nanaware SS et al., (8). However, the prevalence of polyps was higher in patients with secondary infertility in the studies conducted by Nanaware SS et al., (8) and Siddiqui M et al., (9), whereas the prevalence was higher in patients with primary infertility in the studies conducted by Elbareg AM et al., (10) and Gandotra N (11). This can be attributed to the difference in sample sizes of all these studies as well as the difference in the population that was studied. The present study showed a greater prevalence of polyp in secondary infertility patients (17.1%) than the primary infertility patients (12.5%).

The association between endometrial polyps causing subfertility is still not well understood. Some of the reasons may be mechanical interference with sperm transport, distortion of the uterine cavity, embryo implantation or intrauterine inflammation, or due to the increased levels of implantation-inhibiting factors like glycodelin, which alters fertilisation and reduces endometrial receptivity to implantation (12). The outcome of polypectomy in the infertility subgroup of present study patients has not been included in the study. The prevalence of endometrial polyps in present study population with AUB (40-44 years) and AUB (45-50 years) was 17.2% and 30.6%, respectively, and a combined prevalence was 25.64% (Table/Fig 8). This was comparable to the findings of Katke RD and Zarariya AN, and Choudhary J et al., who had reported a hysteroscopic prevalence of 22.7% and 16%, respectively (13),(14).

The prevalence of endometrial polyps in present study population with postmenopausal bleeding was 26.5%, which was significantly different from the prevalence reported by Junnare KK et al., and Godi P and Verma P (Table/Fig 9) who performed similar hysteroscopic studies in postmenopausal women (15),(16). The variation can be attributed to the difference in the sample size in all these studies.

Polyps in these cohorts of patients also run the risk of malignancy. The risk of malignancy in endometrial polyps increases with age, symptomatic bleeding, postmenopausal status, use of Tamoxifen and Hormone replacement therapy, obesity, and hypertension (17). There was no malignancy detected in any of index patients as per the histopathological reports.

Visualisation and direct removal of polyps have been reported to be effective treatment with a lower recurrence rate, compared with removal with polypectomy forceps after hysteroscopic visualisation. Office hysteroscopic polypectomy can be performed using either a bipolar electrode resectoscope or small diameter Hysteroscopic Tissue Removal systems (HTRs). A study has revealed, no difference between the two in terms of complete removal and recurrence of polyps at a one-year follow-up. HTRs polypectomy, however, resulted in less pain and significantly quicker time of procedure compared to bipolar electrodes (18).


In the infertility cohort, the size of primary infertility patients was more than twice the size of secondary infertility patients. A more comparable size would have given a more appropriate prevalence rate. Similarly, there is a large variation in the sample size of the infertility cohort, AUB cohort, and postmenopausal patients cohort, which might have led to the large variation in the prevalence as well. This was because the above-mentioned studies have focussed exclusively on one group of patients, whereas the present study included consecutive patients with infertility, perimenopausal AUB as well as postmenopausal bleeding.


Endometrial polyp is a significant pathology in women with infertility and AUB. Office hysteroscopy is a valuable, simple, low-risk, effective, and safe intervention that gives a quick and confirmatory diagnosis. It should be included in the Gynaecological assessment of women with AUB and infertility.


Clark TJ, Middleton LJ, Am Cooper N, Diwakar L, Denny E, Smith P, et al. A randomised controlled trial of Outpatient versus inpatient Polyp Treatment (OPT) for abnormal uterine bleeding. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(61):01-194.[crossref] [PubMed]
Nijkang NP, Anderson L, Markham R, Manconi F. Endometrial polyps: Pathogenesis, sequelae and treatment. SAGE Open Medicine. 2019;7:2050312119848247. [crossref] [PubMed]
Levy RA, Kumarapeli AR, Spencer HJ, Quick CM. Cervical polyps: Is histologic evaluation necessary? Pathology-Research and Practice. 2016;212(9):800-03. [crossref] [PubMed]
Cunningham GF, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, Cassey BM, et al. Williams Obstetrics, 25th Edition (Section 10.36, page 654), New York, McGraw-Hill Education; 2018.
Uglietti A, Buggio L, Farella M, Chiaffarino F, Dridi D, Vercellini P, et al. The risk of malignancy in uterine polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;237:48-56. [crossref] [PubMed]
Genovese F, Di Guardo F, Monteleone MM, D’Urso V, Colaleo FM, Leanza V, et al. Hysteroscopy as an investigational operative procedure in primary and secondary infertility: A systematic review. Int J Fertil Steril. 2021;15(2):80.
Tsonis O, Gkrozou F, Dimitriou E, Paschopoulos M. Comparative retrospective study on transvaginal sonography versus office hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial pathology among different subgroups. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2021;47(2):669-78. [crossref] [PubMed]
Nanaware SS, Saswade M, Shende PN, Gaikwad P, Mahana S, Kirane A, et al. Role of hysterolaparoscopy in the evaluation of female infertility in tertiary care centre. Int J Contem Med Res. 2016;3(10):3063-65.
Siddiqui M, Ghafoor N, Naznine F, Abdullah R, Chowdhury T. Hysteroscopic evaluation in infertility: Bangladesh perspective. J South Asian Federation of Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;12(1):08. [crossref]
Elbareg AM, Essadi FM, Anwar KI, Elmehashi MO. Value of hysteroscopy in management of unexplained infertility. Asian Pacific J Reproduc. 2014;3(4):295-98. [crossref]
Gandotra N. Role of diagnostic hysteroscopy in establishing the diagnosis of female infertility. Int J Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;2(6):27-30.
Al Chami A, Saridogan E. Endometrial polyps and subfertility. J Obstet Gynaecol of India. 2017;67(1):09-14. [crossref] [PubMed]
Katke RD, Zarariya AN. Use of diagnostic hysteroscopy in abnormal uterine bleeding in perimenopausal age group and its clinicopathological co-relation with ultrasound and histopathology findings: Experience in a tertiary care institute. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(2):413-18. [crossref]
Choudhary J, Acharya V, Jain M. Evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding with transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy in perimenopausal women. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(8):3607-13. [crossref]
Junnare KK, Desai GJ, Shekhawat GS. Hysteroscopy: An effective tool in postmenopausal bleeding. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8(1):159-65. [crossref]
Godi P, Verma P. Prevalence of hysteroscopic findings in postmenopausal bleeding patients and its correlation with clinicohistopathologic diagnosis. J South Asian Federation of Obstet Gynecol. 2020;12(6):354. [crossref]
Karakaya BK, Ozkan NT, Kansu-Celik H, Coskun B, Saridogan E, Evliyaoglu O, et al. Malignancy risk of endometrial polyps among geriatric women. Int J Gerontol. 2018;12(3):215-17. [crossref]
Ceci O, Franchini M, Cardinale S, Cannone R, Giarrè G, Fascilla FD, et al. Comparison of endometrial polyp recurrence in fertile women after office hysteroscopic endometrial polypectomy using two widely spread techniques. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020;46(10):2084-91. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/58702.17007

Date of Submission: Jun 28, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Aug 03, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Sep 14, 2022
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2022

Author declaration:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 29, 2022
• Manual Googling: Sep 03, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Sep 12, 2022 (5%)

Etymology: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)