National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology Named After Academician V.I. Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation, Oparina Street, 4, 117997, Moscow, Russia.
Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Moscow, Russia.
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023 Aug;308(2):413-425. doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06799-4. Epub 2022 Sep 29.
To compare outcomes after laparoscopic cystectomy versus laser vaporization in women of reproductive age with ovarian endometrioma.
Our systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021281781) and was done according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Studies (published until October 2021) were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (key words "cystectomy", "laser vaporization", and "endometrioma"). The search was conducted independently by two investigators (L.P. and S.I.). Inclusion criteria were: women of reproductive age undergoing surgery for symptomatic endometriomas larger than 30 mm. The exclusion criteria were: women who undergo conservative treatment. Outcomes were: risk ratio for recurrence, ovarian reserve and pregnancy rates. The studies included were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized clinical trials (prospective controlled, prospective cohort, retrospective studies, and other types of studies) that included a minimum of 10 patients and written in English. Tools recommended by the Cochrane Society achieved risk-of-bias assessment.
Totally, 874 studies were found, 9 studies were included in qualitative synthesis (822 patients). All the authors compared the efficacy and safety of cystectomy or laser vaporization in reproductive-aged women with ovarian endometrioma. The overall risk of bias for the randomized trials was 80% 'some concerns' and 20% 'low', and for the cohort studies, 50% 'some concerns' and 50% 'low'. The primary meta-analysis focused on recurrence rates (4 studies included) with no statistically significant differences found between these two interventions (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.21, P = 0.13). The next meta-analysis estimated antral follicle count (3 studies) which was significantly lower in cystectomy group (RR = - 2.56, 95% CI - 3.71 to - 1.42, P < 0.0001). Pregnancy rates were analyzed in 3 studies with no statistically significant difference (RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14, P = 0.64).
There was no statistical difference in the recurrence rate and pregnancy rates, but the antral follicle count was higher in the laser vaporization group. However, we need more clinical trials to make stronger recommendations.
比较腹腔镜卵巢囊肿切除术与激光汽化术治疗育龄期卵巢子宫内膜异位症的结局。
我们的系统评价和荟萃分析在 PROSPERO(CRD42021281781)中进行了注册,并按照 PRISMA 2020 清单进行了操作。通过搜索 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、谷歌学术和 ClinicalTrials.gov 数据库(关键词“cystectomy”、“laser vaporization”和“endometrioma”)来确定研究。该搜索由两名调查员(L.P. 和 S.I.)独立进行。纳入标准为:因大于 30mm 的症状性子宫内膜异位症而接受手术的育龄期妇女。排除标准为:接受保守治疗的妇女。结局为:复发风险比、卵巢储备和妊娠率。纳入的研究为随机临床试验(RCT)和非随机临床试验(前瞻性对照、前瞻性队列、回顾性研究和其他类型的研究),至少纳入 10 名患者,且用英文书写。采用 Cochrane 学会推荐的工具进行了偏倚风险评估。
共发现 874 项研究,9 项研究纳入定性综合分析(822 名患者)。所有作者均比较了腹腔镜卵巢囊肿切除术与激光汽化术治疗育龄期卵巢子宫内膜异位症的疗效和安全性。随机试验的整体偏倚风险为 80%“存在一些关注”和 20%“低”,而队列研究的偏倚风险为 50%“存在一些关注”和 50%“低”。主要的荟萃分析侧重于复发率(纳入 4 项研究),发现这两种干预措施之间无统计学差异(RR=0.53,95%CI 0.24 至 1.21,P=0.13)。下一次荟萃分析估计了窦卵泡计数(纳入 3 项研究),发现囊肿切除术组的窦卵泡计数显著较低(RR=-2.56,95%CI-3.71 至-1.42,P<0.0001)。对 3 项研究中的妊娠率进行了分析,差异无统计学意义(RR=0.96,95%CI 0.81 至 1.14,P=0.64)。
在复发率和妊娠率方面,两种方法无统计学差异,但激光汽化组的窦卵泡计数更高。然而,我们需要更多的临床试验来提出更有力的建议。