当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Laparoscopic Ovarian Cystectomy versus Fenestration/Coagulation or Laser Vaporization for the Treatment of Endometriomas: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

文献详情

资源类型:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China; [2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, 6 Tiantan Xili, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Cystectomy Endometrioma Fenestration/coagulation Laparoscopic surgery Laser vaporization

摘要:
Aim: To compare outcomes after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy versus fenestration/coagulation or laser ablation for the treatment of endometrionnas. Methods: Studies were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases using the terms ovarian, endometrioma or endometriosis, cystectomy, fenestration, coagulation, laser, and ablation or vaporization. The outcomes of interest were recurrence of signs/symptoms and endometrioma, reoperation, pregnancy, and ovarian reserve. Results: Seven studies were included. The risk of recurrence of signs/symptoms after surgery was significantly lower for laparoscopic cystectomy compared with fenestration/coagulation [risk ratio (RR): 0.29; 95% CI: 0.15-0.55; I-2 = 0%; p < 0.001], as was the risk of recurrence compared with fenestration/coagulation (RR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.26-0.97; I-2 = 0%; p = 0.04) and laser vaporization (RR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.12-0.88; I-2 = 0%; p = 0.03). The risk of pregnancy was significantly higher for cystectomy compared with fenestration/coagulation (RR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.49-4.69; I-2 = 0%; p < 0.001), but not laser vaporization (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.30-2.80; p = 0.89). There were inadequate data for the meta-analysis of ovarian reserve. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that cystectomy provides better outcomes than fenestration/coagulation or laser ablation regarding recurrence of symptoms and endometrioma as well as pregnancy rate (fenestration/coagulation only). Further studies are needed to clarify the effect of these surgical approaches on ovarian reserve. (C) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel

语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2012]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 妇产科学
最新[2023]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 妇产科学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2011]版:
Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
最新[2023]版:
Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2011版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2010版] 出版后一年[2012版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China;
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China; [2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, 6 Tiantan Xili, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:16409 今日访问量:0 总访问量:869 更新日期:2025-01-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 首都医科大学宣武医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:北京市西城区长椿街45号宣武医院