Farquhar C, Lilford R J, Marjoribanks J, Vandekerckhove P
University of Auckland, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, PO Box 92019, Auckland, New Zealand, 1003.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18(3):CD001122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001122.pub3.
Surgical ovarian wedge resection was the first established treatment for women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) but was largely abandoned due to the risk of postsurgical adhesions and the introduction of medical ovulation induction with clomiphene and gonadotrophins. However, women with PCOS who are treated with gonadotrophins often have an over-production of follicles which may result in ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and multiple pregnancies. Moreover, gonadotrophins, though effective, are costly and time-consuming requiring intensive monitoring. Surgical therapy with laparoscopic ovarian 'drilling' (LOD) may avoid or reduce the need for gonadotrophins or may facilitate their usefulness. The procedure can be done on an outpatient basis with less trauma and fewer postoperative adhesions than with traditional surgical approaches. Many uncontrolled observational studies have claimed that ovarian drilling is followed, at least temporarily, by a high rate of spontaneous ovulation and conception or that subsequent medical ovulation induction becomes easier.
To determine the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic ovarian drilling compared with ovulation induction for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS.
We used the search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group.
We included randomised controlled trials of subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS who undertook laparoscopic ovarian drilling in order to induce ovulation.
Sixteen trials were identified and nine were included in the review. All trials were assessed for quality criteria. The primary outcomes were live birth, ovulation and pregnancy rates and the secondary outcomes were rates of miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and cost.
There was no evidence of a difference in live birth or clinical pregnancy rate between LOD and gonadotrophins and the pooled odds ratios (OR) (all studies) were 1.04 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.85) and 1.08 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.71) respectively. Multiple pregnancy rates were lower with ovarian drilling than with gonadotrophins (1% versus 16%; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.52). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates between the two groups (OR 0.81, 95% 0.36 to 1.86).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a difference in the live birth rate and miscarriage rate in women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS undergoing LOD compared to gonadotrophin treatment. The reduction in multiple pregnancy rates in women undergoing LOD makes this option attractive. However, there are ongoing concerns about long-term effects of LOD on ovarian function.
手术性卵巢楔形切除术是最早确立的用于治疗无排卵性多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)女性的方法,但由于术后粘连风险以及氯米芬和促性腺激素药物促排卵治疗方法的出现,该方法在很大程度上被弃用。然而,接受促性腺激素治疗的PCOS女性常常卵泡过度生成,这可能导致卵巢过度刺激综合征(OHSS)和多胎妊娠。此外,促性腺激素虽然有效,但成本高昂且耗时,需要密切监测。腹腔镜卵巢“打孔”(LOD)手术治疗可能避免或减少对促性腺激素的需求,或增强其效用。该手术可在门诊进行,与传统手术方法相比,创伤更小,术后粘连更少。许多非对照观察性研究称,卵巢打孔术后至少短期内会有较高的自然排卵率和受孕率,或者后续药物促排卵会更容易。
确定与促排卵治疗相比,腹腔镜卵巢打孔术治疗氯米芬抵抗性PCOS不育女性的有效性和安全性。
我们采用了月经紊乱与不育症研究组的检索策略。
我们纳入了对氯米芬抵抗性PCOS不育女性进行腹腔镜卵巢打孔术以诱导排卵的随机对照试验。
共识别出16项试验,其中9项纳入本综述。所有试验均根据质量标准进行评估。主要结局为活产、排卵和妊娠率,次要结局为流产、多胎妊娠、卵巢过度刺激综合征发生率及成本。
没有证据表明LOD组与促性腺激素组在活产率或临床妊娠率上存在差异,合并优势比(OR)(所有研究)分别为1.04(95%CI 0.59至1.85)和1.08(95%CI 0.69至1.71)。卵巢打孔术组的多胎妊娠率低于促性腺激素组(1%对16%;OR 0.13,95%CI 0.03至0.52)。没有证据表明两组间流产率存在差异(OR 0.81,95%CI 0.36至1.86)。
没有证据表明,与促性腺激素治疗相比,接受LOD治疗的氯米芬抵抗性PCOS女性在活产率和流产率上存在差异。接受LOD治疗的女性多胎妊娠率降低,这使得该方法具有吸引力。然而,人们仍持续关注LOD对卵巢功能的长期影响。