Isaac Amital, Kapetanakis Theodoros, Thibeault Erica, Chatburn Luke, Mackenzie Malcolm
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Endometriosis Care Center, Waltham, MA, (all authors); At Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, MA, (all authors).
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Endometriosis Care Center, Waltham, MA, (all authors); At Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, MA, (all authors).
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2025 Mar;32(3):248-257. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014. Epub 2024 Oct 26.
To compare laparoscopic Ablation and Excision in terms of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes as perceived by endometriosis patients.
A Cohort, Method comparison Questionnaire-based study.
Endometriosis-focused Social Media site.
Endometriosis patients with history of Laparoscopic Ablation and Excision.
On-line questionnaire focused on pre and post procedure (ablation and excision) outcomes across 63 measures in 5 realms: Physical Symptoms, Functional Impact, Psycho-emotional Impact, Social/Sexual Impact, Economic/Educational Impact.
Two hundred and thirty-two respondents with surgical history that included laparoscopic ablation and excision (without concomitant or interposed hysterectomy) identified for ablation only physical symptom improvement of 11.3% and 8.5% for dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia respectively. Ablation provided no significant improvement in any other physical symptom measure. Excision was identified as providing improvements across all symptoms, ranging from 28% to 46%. In terms of functional Impact, ablation provided non-significant improvements or worsening of status. Excision demonstrated significant improvement for patients across most measures of Functional Impact. In terms of Psycho-emotional Impact, a worsening of quality of life status is identified in 23 of 24 measures following ablation. Excision demonstrated improvement in 22 of 24 measures. For Social-Sexual Impact, ablation resulted in worsened status across all measures, with excision demonstrating improvements in all measures, significantly so in most. For Economic/Educational Impact, significant worsening of measures or insignificant improvements were demonstrated following ablation. Excision demonstrated significant improvement in most measures. In all realms, pre-Excision status was worse than pre-Ablation. Allowing for a more focused comparison of ablation and excision, 113 respondents with a surgical history of ablation sequentially followed by excision demonstrated outcomes similar to the larger group: overall worsening of status resulting from ablation and overall improvement in status following excision with pre-Excision morbidity higher than pre-Ablation.
In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic endometriosis excision after having undergone endometriosis ablation, the former demonstrated greater beneficial effects over a broad spectrum of symptoms and quality of life measures.
比较腹腔镜消融术和切除术在子宫内膜异位症患者所感知的症状及生活质量结果方面的差异。
一项队列、方法比较的基于问卷的研究。
专注于子宫内膜异位症的社交媒体网站。
有腹腔镜消融术和切除术病史的子宫内膜异位症患者。
在线问卷聚焦于手术前(消融术和切除术)后在5个领域63项指标上的结果,这5个领域为:身体症状、功能影响、心理情感影响、社会/性影响、经济/教育影响。
232名有手术史(包括腹腔镜消融术和切除术,无同时进行或中间穿插子宫切除术)的受访者中,仅接受消融术的患者痛经和月经过多的身体症状改善率分别为11.3%和8.5%。消融术在其他任何身体症状指标上均未带来显著改善。切除术在所有症状方面均有改善,改善幅度在28%至46%之间。在功能影响方面,消融术对功能状态的改善不显著或使其恶化。切除术在大多数功能影响指标上使患者有显著改善。在心理情感影响方面,消融术后24项指标中有23项生活质量状态恶化。切除术在24项指标中有22项显示改善。在社会/性影响方面,消融术使所有指标的状态恶化,切除术在所有指标上均有改善,大多数指标改善显著。在经济/教育影响方面,消融术后指标显著恶化或改善不显著。切除术在大多数指标上有显著改善。在所有领域,切除术前的状态比消融术前更差。为了更有针对性地比较消融术和切除术,113名有消融术手术史随后又接受切除术的受访者的结果与较大样本组相似:消融术导致状态总体恶化,切除术使状态总体改善,切除术前的发病率高于消融术前。
在这组先接受子宫内膜异位症消融术然后接受腹腔镜子宫内膜异位症切除术的患者中,后者在广泛的症状和生活质量指标方面显示出更大的有益效果。