| Literature DB >> 33607770 |
Jianmin Chen1, Dong Huang, Jiaren Zhang, Libing Shi, Jing Li, Songying Zhang.
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This study investigates the effect of 2 laparoscopic methods on ovarian reserve in patients of reproductive age with endometriomas.This was a retrospective study performed at a tertiary medical center from Jan 1st to Dec 31st, 2016. Laparoscopic cystectomy (group 1, 46 patients) and laparoscopic ovarian drainage and ablation with bipolar coagulation at low power (group 2, 30 patients) were performed to treat endometriomas larger than 3 cm. Anti-Müllerian hormone was used to assess ovarian reserve before and after surgery.There were no statistically significant differences in patients' baseline clinical characteristics, endometriotic stage, operative time, and follow-up time between the groups. The mean serum anti-Müllerian hormone concentration decreased significantly from 4.25 ng/ml to 3.40 ng/ml in group 1 compared with 4.47 ng/ml to 3.95 ng/ml in group 2 (P = .04). Pregnancy rates were 71.05% in group 1 and 73.08% in group 2, with a mean follow-up of 30.40 months and 32.35 months (P > .99), respectively. Although there was no statistical significance, the recurrence rate in group 1 was lower than that in group 2 (4.35% vs 16.67%, respectively; P = .11). The mean diameter of recurrent cysts was 1.75 cm in group 1 and 1.54 cm in group 2 (P = .13).Appropriate laparoscopic electrocautery of the endometrioma wall with a bipolar instrument may be a valid alternative to traditional laparoscopic cystectomy, with less effects on ovarian reserve.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33607770 PMCID: PMC7899828 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024362
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Figure 1Laparoscopic endometrioma cystectomy. (A) The endometrioma is opened. (B) Identifying a clear cleavage plane between the endometrioma wall and the ovarian cortex. (C) The ovarian cyst wall is stripped carefully from the adjacent normal ovarian tissue. (D) Removing the endometrioma with minimal bleeding resulting in minimal damage to the ovary. (E) Suturing and closing the ovarian incision. (F) Final pelvic view, and removing the specimen from the abdomen in a specimen bag.
Figure 2Laparoscopic endometrioma drainage and ablation with bipolar coagulation. (A) Drainage, irrigation, and inspection of the internal wall. (B) A 1-cm × 1-cm biopsy of the cyst wall is obtained for histological examination. (C) Coagulating the cyst lining systematically using bipolar forceps at 30 W. (D) The ovary is cooled frequently using irrigation fluid. (E) Coagulating the whole internal wall with very short-duration ablation times until the color of the cyst wall changes to yellowish-white without damaging the adjacent ovarian tissue. (F) When mild redness of the internal wall returns shortly after ablation, the appropriate depth of destruction of the endometrioma has been achieved.
Baseline clinical characteristics and ultrasonographic findings of 2 groups of patients with ovarian endometriomas.
| Group 1 (n = 46) | Group 2 (n = 30) |
| |
| Age (yrs) (mean ±SD) | 28.65 ± 3.66 | 30.23 ± 3.94 | .66 |
| BMI (kg/m2) (mean ±SD) | 20.14 ± 2.25 | 21.17 ± 2.25 | .65 |
| Nulliparous | 34 (73.91%) | 21 (70.00%) | .80 |
| Infertility | 30 (65.22%) | 22 (73.33%) | .61 |
| Dysmenorrhea | 18 (39.13%) | 12 (40.00%) | >.99 |
| Chronic pelvic pain | 4 (8.70%) | 2 (6.67%) | >.99 |
| Diameter of endometrioma (cm) (mean ±SD) | 4.81 ± 1.48 | 3.95 ± 1.15 | .09 |
| Unilateral | 37 (80.43%) | 22 (73.33%) | .58 |
| Bilateral | 9 (19.57%) | 8 (26.67%) |
Surgical characteristics, follow-up results of 2 groups of patients with ovarian endometriomas.
| Group 1 (n = 46) | Group 2 (n = 30) |
| |
| Median rAFS score (mean ±SD) | 35.91 ± 20.02 | 43.93 ± 21.73 | .42 |
| Percentage of patients with stage III | (33/46) 71.74% | (18/30) 60.00% | .33 |
| Percentage of patients with stage IV | (13/46) 28.26% | (12/30) 40.00% | |
| Mean operating time (min) (mean ±SD) | 95.92 ± 31.03 | 91.61 ± 37.21 | .60 |
| Salpingectomy | 0 | 1 | .40 |
| Postoperative hospital stay (d) (mean ±SD) | 2.78 ± 0.85 | 2.76 ± 0.89 | .87 |
| Follow-up (m) (mean ±SD) | 30.40 ± 3.83 | 32.35 ± 4.14 | .54 |
| Preoperative AMH (ng/ml) (mean ±SD) | 4.25 ± 1.49 | 4.47 ± 1.56 | .65 |
| Postoperative AMH (ng/ml) (mean ±SD) | 3.40 ± 1.35 | 3.95 ± 1.79 | .04 |
| Decrease of AMH (ng/ml) (mean ±SD) | 0.85 ± 0.64 | 0.52 ± 0.58 | .04 |
| Diminished ovarian reserve | (1/46) 2.17% | (1/30) 3.33% | >.99 |
| Conception plan | 38 | 26 | .75 |
| Pregnancy rate | (27/38) 71.05% | (19/26) 73.08% | >.99 |
| Spontaneous | 16 | 10 | .77 |
| IVF | 11 | 9 | |
| Abortion | 1 | 3 | 0.29 |
| Ectopic pregnancy | 1 | 0 | >.99 |
| Time of recurrence (m) (25th–75th) | 17.00 ± 2.83 (15–19) | 12.20 ± 7.40 (3–22) | .23 |
| Diameter of recurrent cyst (cm) (mean ±SD) | 1.75 ± 0.35 | 1.54 ± 0.68 | .13 |
| Recurrence at 12 m | |||
| Per patient | (0/46) 0.00% | (2/30) 6.67% | .15 |
| Per endometrioma | (0/55) 0.00% | (2/38) 5.26% | .16 |
| Recurrence at 24 m | |||
| Per patient | (2/46) 4.35% | (5/30) 16.67% | .11 |
| Per endometrioma | (2/55) 3.64% | (5/38) 13.16% | .12 |