| Literature DB >> 17651554 |
Alfonso Rossetti1, Ornella Sizzi, Flavia Chiarotti, Giuseppe Florio.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Conflicting opinions about laparoscopic myomectomy (LM) are still present regarding indications and risks related to reproductive outcome. We reviewed our 13-year experience (1) to identify risk factors or changes in methods that have improved our myomectomy technique and (2) to evaluate how the learning curve and improved surgical devices influenced our procedures, and (3) to study the myomectomy scar with a power color Doppler ultrasound (US).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17651554 PMCID: PMC3015797
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JSLS ISSN: 1086-8089 Impact factor: 2.172
Demographic Characteristics of Patients and Outcome Measures
| Groups I, II, III | Group I | Group II | Group III | Significance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. patients | 332 | 90 | 33 | 209 | |
| Patient age (Mean yr ± SD) | 35.47 ± 4.8 | 35.76 ± 4.2 | 34.36 ± 5.1 | 35.517 ± 4.9 | NS |
| Myoma no. (Mean ± SD) | 2.238 ± 1.7 | 2.42 ± 1.85 | 1.63 ± 1.16 | 2.25 ± 1.8 | I vs II: P < 0.0065 |
| Myoma diameter (Mean cm ± SD) | 6.20 ± 2.7 | 4.91 ± 2.2 | 6.18 ± 1.9 | 6.76 ± 2.7 | III vs I: P < 0.0000 II vs I: P < 0.0163 |
| Operating time (Mean min ± SD) | 124.021 ± 52.2 | 142.27 ± 58.32 | 122.18 ± 35.39 | 118.66 ± 49.8 | III vs I: P < 0.0003 II vs I: P < 0.0012 |
| HB drop (Mean g/mL ± SD) | 1.06 ± 0.8 | 1.11 ± 0.47 | 0.68 ± 0.47 | 1.11 ± 0.9 | I vs III: NS |
| Hospital stay (Mean days ± SD) | 2.0 ± 0.57 | 2.0 ± 0.73 | 1.8 ± 0.58 | 2.04 ± 0.43 | NS |
| No. patients | 98 | 16 | 9 | 73 | |
| Operating time (Mean min ± SD) | 116.27 ± 31.8 | 156.87 ± 25.2 | 106.66 ± 21.8 | 108.56 ± 27.2 | I vs II: P < 0.0000 I vs III: P < 0.0000 |
| HB drop (Mean g/mL ± SD) | 1.03 ± 0.8 | 1.62 ± 0.8 | 1.39 ± 0.5 | 0.90 ± 0.4 | I vs III: P < 0.0011 I vs II: P < 0.0078 |
Group I = earlier years; Group II = introduction of electromechanical morcellator; Group III = introduction of vasoconstrictive agents.
P < 0.016 was considered as statistically significant.
Randomized Groups for US Color Doppler Study of the Myomectomy Scar Demographic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes
| Laparoscopy and Laparotomy | Laparotomy | Laparoscopy | Significance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | 30 | 10 | 20 | NS |
| Median age [median yr (range)] | 36 (26-42) | 35 (26-39) | 36 (29-42) | NS |
| Myoma size [median cm; mean ± SD (range)] | 5; 5.4 ± 3.68 (1-10) | 5; 5.3 ± 3.59 (2-10) | 5; 5.5 ± 3.75 (1-9) | NS |
| Myomas removed per patient | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.1 | NS |
Developments in Techniques of Myomectomy
| Past Technique | Present Technique | |
|---|---|---|
| Pedunculated myomas | Bipolar forceps | Monopolar or bipolar current Suture or endoscopic loop |
| Vasoconstrictive agents | No | Diluted ornithine vasopressin and now, diluted (20 IU:500 ml) argipressin. |
| Enucleation | Mostly with electrosurgery | Mostly mechanical |
| Suture | Vicryl 0 Single layer | Vicryl 1 or 2 Two layers, single or continuous |
| Morcellation | Manual | Electromechanical |
| GnRH analogs for myomas >6 cm | Yes | No, only with persistent menometrorrhagia or Serious anaemia |
| GnRH analogs for myomas >10 cm | Yes | Only in case of difficult mobilization |