• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评价枸橼酸氯米酚抵抗的多囊卵巢综合征患者中单侧与双侧卵巢打孔的效果。

Evaluation of unilateral versus bilateral ovarian drilling in clomiphene citrate resistant cases of polycystic ovarian syndrome.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.

出版信息

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Oct;280(4):573-8. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-0961-z. Epub 2009 Feb 13.

DOI:10.1007/s00404-009-0961-z
PMID:19214545
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) has been put forward as the treatment of choice in women with clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), with tubo-ovarian adhesion formation as the major disadvantage. Our study proposed to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic unilateral ovarian drilling with bilateral ovarian drilling in terms of ovulation and pregnancy rate with the expected advantage of decreasing postoperative adhesion rate and change in fimbiro ovarian relationship with unilateral drilling.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study included 44 patients with anovulatory infertility due to PCOS. Twenty-two patients underwent unilateral ovarian drilling in group-I and 22 patients underwent bilateral ovarian drilling in group-II between June 2005 and June 2007. The number of drilling site in each ovary was limited to five. The clinical and biochemical response, ovulation and pregnancy rates over a follow-up period of 1 year were compared. Tubo-ovarian adhesion rate was compared during cesarean section or during repeat laparoscopy.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of clinical and biochemical response, ovulation rate and pregnancy rate. Postoperatively, tubo-ovarian adhesions could be assessed in 36.3% of the patients and no adhesions were found in a single case in either group.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral drilling cauterization of ovary is equally efficacious as bilateral drilling in inducing ovulation and achieving pregnancy. Unilateral ovarian drilling may be a suitable option in clomiphene citrate resistant infertility patient of PCOS which can replace bilateral ovarian drilling with the potential advantage of decreasing the chances of adhesion formation.

摘要

目的

腹腔镜卵巢打孔术(LOD)已被提出作为枸橼酸氯米酚(CC)耐药多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)患者的治疗选择,其主要缺点是形成输卵管卵巢粘连。我们的研究旨在比较腹腔镜单侧卵巢打孔术和双侧卵巢打孔术在排卵率和妊娠率方面的疗效,预计单侧打孔术可降低术后粘连率和改变纤维卵巢关系。

方法

这项前瞻性随机研究纳入了 44 例因 PCOS 导致排卵障碍性不孕的患者。22 例患者在组 I 中接受单侧卵巢打孔术,22 例患者在组 II 中接受双侧卵巢打孔术,每组患者的手术时间为 2005 年 6 月至 2007 年 6 月。每个卵巢的打孔点限制为 5 个。比较了随访 1 年内的临床和生化反应、排卵率和妊娠率。在剖宫产或重复腹腔镜检查时比较了输卵管卵巢粘连率。

结果

两组在临床和生化反应、排卵率和妊娠率方面无统计学差异。术后,36.3%的患者可评估输卵管卵巢粘连情况,两组均未发现粘连。

结论

单侧卵巢打孔术与双侧卵巢打孔术在诱导排卵和妊娠方面同样有效。对于枸橼酸氯米酚耐药性 PCOS 不孕患者,单侧卵巢打孔术可能是一种合适的选择,其潜在的优势是降低粘连形成的机会。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of unilateral versus bilateral ovarian drilling in clomiphene citrate resistant cases of polycystic ovarian syndrome.评价枸橼酸氯米酚抵抗的多囊卵巢综合征患者中单侧与双侧卵巢打孔的效果。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Oct;280(4):573-8. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-0961-z. Epub 2009 Feb 13.
2
Evaluation of a new surgical approach for the treatment of clomiphene citrate-resistant infertility in polycystic ovary syndrome: laparoscopic ovarian multi-needle intervention.评估一种治疗多囊卵巢综合征中克罗米芬抵抗性不孕的新手术方法:腹腔镜卵巢多针干预。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005 Jul-Aug;12(4):355-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2005.05.017.
3
A prospective randomized trial comparing the clinical and endocrinological outcome with rosiglitazone versus laparoscopic ovarian drilling in patients with polycystic ovarian disease resistant to ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate.一项前瞻性随机试验比较了罗格列酮与腹腔镜卵巢钻孔术治疗对氯米酚诱导排卵抵抗的多囊卵巢病患者的临床和内分泌结局。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 May;281(5):939-44. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1305-8. Epub 2009 Dec 3.
4
Metformin administration and laparoscopic ovarian drilling improve ovarian response to clomiphene citrate (CC) in oligo-anovulatory CC-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome.对于多囊卵巢综合征的少排卵或无排卵且对克罗米芬(CC)耐药的女性,服用二甲双胍和腹腔镜卵巢打孔术可改善卵巢对克罗米芬(CC)的反应。
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2005 Dec;63(6):631-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2005.02392.x.
5
Preoperative luteinizing hormone levels predict the ovulatory response to laparoscopic ovarian drilling in patients with clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome.术前促黄体生成素水平可预测枸橼酸氯米芬抵抗性多囊卵巢综合征患者对腹腔镜卵巢打孔术的排卵反应。
Gynecol Endocrinol. 2005 Dec;21(6):307-11. doi: 10.1080/09513590500424214.
6
Effect of N-acetyl-cysteine after ovarian drilling in clomiphene citrate-resistant PCOS women: a pilot study.枸橼酸氯米酚抵抗的多囊卵巢综合征患者行卵巢打孔术后应用 N-乙酰半胱氨酸的疗效:一项初步研究。
Reprod Biomed Online. 2010 Mar;20(3):403-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.12.012. Epub 2009 Dec 14.
7
Does unilateral laparoscopic diathermy adjusted to ovarian volume increase the chances of ovulation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome?单侧腹腔镜下热凝术是否会增加多囊卵巢综合征患者排卵的机会?
Hum Reprod. 2013 Sep;28(9):2417-24. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det273. Epub 2013 Jul 2.
8
Efficacy of laparoscopic ovarian drilling for polycystic ovary syndrome resistant to clomiphene citrate.腹腔镜卵巢打孔术治疗对枸橼酸氯米芬耐药的多囊卵巢综合征的疗效
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2007 Apr;33(2):174-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2007.00504.x.
9
Randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic ovarian diathermy with clomiphene citrate as a first-line method of ovulation induction in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.一项随机对照试验,比较腹腔镜卵巢打孔术与枸橼酸氯米芬作为多囊卵巢综合征女性排卵诱导一线方法的疗效。
Hum Reprod. 2009 Jan;24(1):219-25. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den325. Epub 2008 Sep 14.
10
Review of nonsurgical and surgical treatment and the role of insulin-sensitizing agents in the management of infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome.多囊卵巢综合征不孕女性的非手术和手术治疗及胰岛素增敏剂在其管理中的作用综述
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004 Jul;83(7):614-21. doi: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00481.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Unilateral or Bilateral Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.多囊卵巢综合征的单侧或双侧腹腔镜卵巢打孔术:随机试验的荟萃分析
Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2024 Dec 12;14(1):14-23. doi: 10.4103/gmit.gmit_89_23. eCollection 2025 Jan-Mar.
2
Ovarian Drilling: Back to the Future.卵巢钻孔术:回到未来。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Jul 27;58(8):1002. doi: 10.3390/medicina58081002.
3
Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome.
腹腔镜卵巢打孔术用于无排卵性多囊卵巢综合征女性的促排卵治疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Feb 11;2(2):CD001122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001122.pub5.
4
Ovarian surgery for symptom relief in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.多囊卵巢综合征女性的卵巢手术以缓解症状
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 10;11(11):CD009526. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009526.pub2.
5
Unilateral Versus Bilateral Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling Using Thermal Dose Adjusted According to Ovarian Volume in CC-Resistant PCOS, A Randomized Study.一项随机研究:在克罗米芬抵抗性多囊卵巢综合征中,根据卵巢体积调整热剂量的单侧与双侧腹腔镜卵巢打孔术
J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017 Oct;67(5):356-362. doi: 10.1007/s13224-017-1010-7. Epub 2017 Jun 2.
6
Comparative effectiveness of 9 ovulation-induction therapies in patients with clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome: a network meta-analysis.枸橼酸氯米酚抵抗的多囊卵巢综合征患者中 9 种促排卵治疗的疗效比较:一项网状荟萃分析。
Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 19;7(1):3812. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-03803-9.
7
Comparison between Unilateral and Bilateral Ovarian Drilling in Clomiphene Citrate Resistance Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial of Efficacy.克罗米芬抵抗性多囊卵巢综合征患者单侧与双侧卵巢打孔术的比较:一项疗效的随机临床试验
Int J Fertil Steril. 2015 Apr-Jun;9(1):9-16. doi: 10.22074/ijfs.2015.4202. Epub 2015 Apr 21.
8
Laparoscopic ovarian drilling: An alternative but not the ultimate in the management of polycystic ovary syndrome.腹腔镜卵巢打孔术:多囊卵巢综合征治疗中的一种替代方法,但并非终极手段。
J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2015 Jan-Jun;6(1):40-8. doi: 10.4103/0976-9668.149076.
9
The effectiveness of reproductive surgery in the treatment of female infertility: facts, views and vision.生殖手术治疗女性不孕症的有效性:事实、观点与展望。
Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2010;2(4):232-52.