A Aminsharifi1, F Afsar, M Jafari, A Tourchi. 1. Department of Urology, Laparoscopic Research Center, Stem Cell and Transgenic Technology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To describe the role of laparoscopy for removal of entrapped vaginal metallic dilator (20cm in length and 3.5cm in diameter) in a case of male-to-female transsexual. PRESENTATION OF THE CASE: The patient was a 24-year old male-to-female transsexual, presented with entrapment and upward migration of the vaginal metallic dilator 1 week before admission. She underwent gender reassignment surgery with sigmoid vaginoplasty 8 month before admission. After 3-port transperitoneal laparoscopic abdominopelvic exploration, through an incision over the sigmoid vagina the dilator was extracted. The sigmoid vagina was repaired with free-hand intracorporeal laparoscopic suturing and knot-tying techniques in two layers and the dilator was removed by extending the site of umbilical port. The operative time was 70min. DISCUSSION: Up to 60% of rectosigmoidal or vaginal foreign bodies can be extracted transanally or transvaginally with adequate sedation. When surgical exploration is indicated, a longitudinal laparatomy is performed to extract the foreign body. To reduce the associated morbidity of an open procedure in our patient, we performed a laparoscopic approach for complete abdominal exploration for possible presence of intestinal or sigmoidal injuries together with removal of this large metalic dilator. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic approaches in cases of neovaginal foreign body are useful when the endovaginal approaches have failed, especially in transsexual patients, to prevent another major open surgery.
INTRODUCTION: To describe the role of laparoscopy for removal of entrapped vaginal metallic dilator (20cm in length and 3.5cm in diameter) in a case of male-to-female transsexual. PRESENTATION OF THE CASE: The patient was a 24-year old male-to-female transsexual, presented with entrapment and upward migration of the vaginal metallic dilator 1 week before admission. She underwent gender reassignment surgery with sigmoid vaginoplasty 8 month before admission. After 3-port transperitoneal laparoscopic abdominopelvic exploration, through an incision over the sigmoid vagina the dilator was extracted. The sigmoid vagina was repaired with free-hand intracorporeal laparoscopic suturing and knot-tying techniques in two layers and the dilator was removed by extending the site of umbilical port. The operative time was 70min. DISCUSSION: Up to 60% of rectosigmoidal or vaginal foreign bodies can be extracted transanally or transvaginally with adequate sedation. When surgical exploration is indicated, a longitudinal laparatomy is performed to extract the foreign body. To reduce the associated morbidity of an open procedure in our patient, we performed a laparoscopic approach for complete abdominal exploration for possible presence of intestinal or sigmoidal injuries together with removal of this large metalic dilator. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic approaches in cases of neovaginal foreign body are useful when the endovaginal approaches have failed, especially in transsexual patients, to prevent another major open surgery.