Dataset Information

Preservation of the ovarian reserve and hemostasis during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy by a hemostatic agent versus suturing for patients with ovarian endometriosis: study protocol for randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial (PRAHA-2 trial).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Endometriosis (EMS) can be implanted everywhere, especially in pelvic organs. EMS can be asymptomatic, but it can result in pelvic pain and infertility by inducing local inflammation and pelvic adhesion. The prevalence of EMS is about 10% in reproductive-age women and higher in women with pelvic pain or infertility. For young patients with ovarian EMS, laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy is effective in relieving pelvic pain and preventing local recurrence. However, there is a concern that the ovarian reserve would decrease after the operation because of the removal of a part of the normal ovarian tissue and thermal damage during hemostasis, which depends on the types of hemostasis such as bipolar electrocoagulation, suturing, and the use of a hemostatic agent. In this study, we aim to evaluate the protective effect for the ovarian reserve and hemostasis between a hemostatic agent and suturing during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy for patients with ovarian EMS.

Methods

This study is a randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial, where a total of 90 patients with ovarian EMS will be randomly assigned to the experimental (hemostatic agent) and control (suturing) groups. In the control group, a barbed suture will be applied for hemostasis, whereas a hemostatic agent will be applied in the experimental group. If two methods are insufficient, bipolar electrocoagulation will be applied for complete hemostasis. As the primary endpoint, the reduction rate of serum anti- Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels reflecting the ovarian reserve will be compared between the two groups 12 weeks after surgery. As secondary endpoints, we will compare the reduction rate of AMH level 48 weeks after surgery, the time required to complete hemostasis, the success rate of hemostasis within 10 min, and adverse events associated with operation.

Discussion

We expect that the protective effect for the ovarian reserve and hemostasis may be comparable between the two methods, suggesting that a hemostatic agent may be preferred considering that it is easy to use during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04643106 . Registered on 22 November 2020.

SUBMITTER: Lim H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8293561 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:STUDY QUESTION:Does CO2 laser vaporization offer better results in treating endometrioma in terms of ovarian reserve preservation compared to traditional cystectomy? SUMMARY ANSWER:Assessing both antral follicle count (AFC) and serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as measures of ovarian reserve, the results suggest that CO2 technology may be an alternative treatment for endometrioma, causing minimal damage to adjacent healthy ovarian tissue. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY:Excisional surgery has been questioned as an ideal surgical approach for endometriomas because it is associated with potential reduction of ovarian reserve. Recently, vaporization with CO2 laser in-line-of-sight, according to the 'three-step procedure', has been proposed as the best method to preserve ovarian function. However, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to compare cystectomy and 'one-step' CO2 fiber laser vaporization (without GnRH agonist therapy) with respect to the ovarian reserve. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION:A multicentre randomized clinical trial including 60 patients was performed between July 2017 and February 2018. Computerized randomization was conducted to allocate them in a proportion of 1:1 either to Group 1 (laparoscopic stripping: cystectomy) or Group 2 (CO2 laser vaporization). Patients in Group 1 underwent a standardized laparoscopic stripping technique; patients in Group 2 underwent drainage of the cyst content, biopsy and vaporization of the internal wall with a CO2 fiber laser. Patients underwent pelvic ultrasound examination to determine the AFC and blood sampling to determine AMH levels before surgery and at 1- and 3-month follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS:Patients undergoing surgery for symptomatic endometriomas (infertility and/or pelvic pain) larger than 3 cm were randomized in two groups according to the surgical technique. Patients aged ?40 years, or with deep infiltrating endometriosis/adenomyosis, or previously submitted to surgical procedures on the ovaries or to hysterectomy were excluded from the study. The primary endpoint was the comparison of intra-group AFC changes before and after surgery (?AFC) between the two groups (?AFC Group 1 versus ?AFC Group 2). The secondary endpoint was the modification of serum AMH before and after surgery (?AMH) between the two groups (?AMH Group 1 versus ?AMH Group 2). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:The AFC of the operated ovary was significantly increased in Group 2 (laser vaporization) compared with Group 1 (cystectomy) after surgery (Group 1: from 4.1 ± 2.2 [mean ± SD] at baseline to 6.3 ± 3.5 at 3-month follow-up; 95% CI: 0.9-4; Group 2: from 3.6 ± 1.9 at baseline to 8.6 ± 4.2 at 3-month follow-up; 95% CI: 2.8-7.1; P = 0.016); serum AMH levels were significantly reduced at 3 months in Group 1 (from 2.6 ± 1.4 ng/mL at baseline to 1.8 ± 0.8 ng/mL at 3-month follow-up; 95% CI: -1.3 to -0.2; P = 0.012) compared with no reduction in Group 2 (from 2.3 ± 1.1 ng/mL at baseline to 1.9 ± 0.9 ng/mL at 3-month follow-up; 95% CI: -1 to -0.2; P = 0.09). LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION:The key limitations of the trial were the low accuracy of AFC in estimating the ovarian reserve in ovaries with endometriomas, the limited study size and the relatively short follow-up, which do not allow us to draw definitive conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS:The present study suggests that CO2 technology may treat endometrioma with minimal damage to the adjacent healthy ovarian tissue; however, this study should be considered as a preliminary clinical trial, intended to stimulate future larger trials to address this clinically relevant issue. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S):None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03227640. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE:9 July 2017. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLLMENT:24 July 2017.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Laparoscopic cystectomy provides more favourable outcomes as regards the recurrence and subsequent clinical pregnancy rates. It is associated with significant reduction in the ovarian reserve due to the inevitable removal of unaffected ovarian tissue. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficiency of Surgicel in preventing recurrence of endometriomas after their laparoscopic conservative management (cystectomy or drainage). MATERIAL AND METHODS:A randomized controlled trial included two hundred women (candidate for conservative laparoscopic management of ovarian endometriomas). They were randomized into four groups; group D in which patients underwent laparoscopic drainage of the endometrioma, group C in which patients underwent laparoscopic cystectomy of the endometrioma, group DS in which patients underwent laparoscopic drainage followed by insertion of Surgicel inside the cyst cavity & group CS in which patients underwent laparoscopic cystectomy of the endometrioma followed by insertion of Surgicel inside the remaining ovarian tissues. All patients were followed up for 2?years & the primary outcome was the recurrence of endometriomas in the ipsilateral ovary & the postoperative ovarian reserve was reassessed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS:The Surgicel-treated groups had significantly lower hazard of recurrence compared to untreated groups (p?=?0.004). Group CS had significantly lower hazard of recurrence compared to Group D & C (p?=?0.014, 0.046 respectively). Group DS had significantly lower hazard of recurrence compared to Group D (p?=?0.039) but it not significantly different from Group C (p?=?0.112). Group DS had the lowest drop of AMH and was significantly lower than the other three groups. CONCLUSION:Surgicel reduces effectively the recurrence risk of endometriomas and its use during laparoscopic drainage is an effective alternative for traditional laparoscopic cystectomy with minimal affection of the patient ovarian reserve. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Name of the registry: clinicaltrials.gov. Trial registration number NCT02947724 . Date of registration October 28, 2016.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Women with endometriosis and previous cystectomy may respond less well to gonadotropin stimulation, which results in fewer oocytes retrieved and poor pregnancy outcomes. Choosing an appropriate protocol for such populations is essential. This study involved an analysis of the effect of different controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols on the clinical outcomes of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in women with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) who underwent ovarian endometrioma cystectomy. METHODS:A total of 342 patients that underwent IVF-ET treatment at the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital from January 1, 2013 to April 30, 2018 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were distributed into three groups according to the COS protocols, namely prolonged GnRH-agonist (Group A, n?=?113), GnRH-antagonist (Group B, n?=?121), and long GnRH-agonist (Group C, n?=?108). The clinical and laboratory parameters of the three protocols were analyzed and a logistic regression of clinical pregnancy and live births was conducted. RESULTS:There were no significant differences in the age, infertility duration, basic follicle stimulation hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), or estradiol (E2) levels as well as other baseline characteristics among groups (P?>?0.05). The total gonadotrophin (Gn) dosage and duration tended to be less in the GnRH-antagonist group than in the others (P?<?0.05). No significant differences were found in the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate among the groups, but the prolonged GnRH-agonist group showed the highest rates. In addition, no significant differences were present in the number of retrieved oocytes, oocyte fertilization rate, embryo utilization rate, live birth rate, abortion rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, or multiple pregnancy rate in the three groups (P?>?0.05). Age had a significant effect on both clinical pregnancy and live birth. CONCLUSION:For those DOR patients who had undergone ovarian endometriosis cystectomy, the prolonged GnRH-agonist protocol may achieve better clinical IVF-ET outcomes, but there were no significant differences from the other groups. The GnRH-antagonist protocol may reduce the cost and time of drug treatment. Age should be considered for its influence on pregnancy outcome. However, a larger sample size may be needed for further study.