{"paper_id":"d558e514-a675-4cfb-b7cc-587286e820b4","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose\nThis study aimed to compare ovarian reserve between laparoscopic suturing and bipolar coagulation techniques in women with unilateral endometrioma.\nMethods\nIn a prospective randomized clinical trial, 109 patients with unilateral endometrioma underwent laparoscopic cystectomy. Patients were then randomized to undergo hemostasis with either bipolar coagulation (n = 57) or suturing (n = 52) technique. We evaluated the impact of surgery and hemostasis techniques on ovarian reserve using serum levels of anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) that were measured preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively.\nResults\nBaseline characteristics such as age and preoperative AMH and FSH levels were similar between the two study groups. At 3-month follow-up, in both groups, postoperative AMH levels were significantly lower and FSH levels were significantly higher than before surgery. The decline rate of AMH levels was significantly greater in the bipolar coagulation (53.42 ± 15.28) group than in the suturing group (15.94 ± 18.55). Furthermore, patients in the suturing group had higher AMH and lower FSH as compared with the other group (p < 0.001).\nConclusion\nAfter laparoscopic stripping of endometrioma, intracorporeal suturing showed less damage on ovarian reserve as compared with bipolar electrocoagulation. Therefore, hemostatic suturing technique may be considered as a better choice after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nDe Ziegler D, Borghese B, Chapron C (2010) Endometriosis and infertility: pathophysiology and management. Lancet 376(9742):730–738\nJones K, Fan A, Sutton C (2002) The ovarian endometrioma: why is it so poorly managed? Indicators from an anonymous survey. Hum Reprod 17(4):845–849\nHart RJ, Hickey M, Maouris P, Buckett W (2008) Excisional surgery versus ablative surgery for ovarian endometriomata. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16(2):CD004992\nVercellini P, Chapron C, De Giorgi O, Consonni D, Frontino G, Crosignani PG (2003) Coagulation or excision of ovarian endometriomas? Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(3):606–610\nJenkins S, Olive DL, Haney AF (1986) Endometriosis: pathogenetic implications of the anatomic distribution. Obstet Gynecol 67(3):335–338\nRaffi F, Metwally M, Amer S (2012) The impact of excision of ovarian endometrioma on ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97(9):3146–3154\nSomigliana E, Berlanda N, Benaglia L, Viganò P, Vercellini P, Fedele L (2012) Surgical excision of endometriomas and ovarian reserve: a systematic review on serum antimüllerian hormone level modifications. Fertil Steril 98(6):1531–1538\nBenaglia L, Somigliana E, Vighi V, Ragni G, Vercellini P, Fedele L (2010) Rate of severe ovarian damage following surgery for endometriomas. Hum Reprod 25(3):678–682\nReich H, Abrao MS (2006) Post-surgical ovarian failure after laparoscopic excision of bilateral endometriomas: is this rare problem preventable? Am J Obstet Gynecol 195(2):339–340\nFanchin R, Schonäuer LM, Righini C, Guibourdenche J, Frydman R, Taieb J (2003) Serum anti-Müllerian hormone is more strongly related to ovarian follicular status than serum inhibin B, estradiol, FSH and LH on day 3. Hum Reprod 18(2):323–327\nIwase A, Hirokawa W, Goto M, Takikawa S, Nagatomo Y, Nakahara T, Manabe S, Kikkawa F (2010) Serum anti-Müllerian hormone level is a useful marker for evaluating the impact of laparoscopic cystectomy on ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 94(7):2846–2849\nDewailly D, Andersen CY, Balen A, Broekmans F, Dilaver N, Fanchin R, Griesinger G, Kelsey TW, La Marca A, Lambalk C (2014) The physiology and clinical utility of anti-Müllerian hormone in women. Hum Reprod Update 20(3):370–385\nSong T, Kim WY, Lee KW, Kim KH (2014) Effect on ovarian reserve of hemostasis by bipolar coagulation versus suture during laparoendoscopic single-site cystectomy for ovarian endometriomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22(3):415–420\nTakashima A, Takeshita N, Otaka K, Kinoshita T (2013) Effects of bipolar electrocoagulation versus suture after laparoscopic excision of ovarian endometrioma on the ovarian reserve and outcome of in vitro fertilization. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 39(7):1246–1252\nCoric M, Barisic D, Pavicic D, Karadza M, Banovic M (2011) Electrocoagulation versus suture after laparoscopic stripping of ovarian endometriomas assessed by antral follicle count: preliminary results of randomized clinical trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 283(2):373–378\nÖzgönen H, Erdemoglu E, Günyeli İ, Güney M, Mungan T (2013) Comparison of the effects of laparoscopic bipolar electrocoagulation and intracorporeal suture application to ovarian reserve in benign ovarian cysts. Arch Gynecol Obstet 287(4):729–732\nTsolakidis D, Pados G, Vavilis D, Athanatos D, Tsalikis T, Giannakou A, Tarlatzis BC (2010) The impact on ovarian reserve after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy versus three-stage management in patients with endometriomas: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril 94(1):71–77\nLittman E, Giudice L, Lathi R, Berker B, Milki A, Nezhat C (2005) Role of laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis in patients with failed in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 84(6):1574–1578\nMoscarini M, Milazzo GN, Assorgi C, Pacchiarotti A, Caserta D (2014) Ovarian stripping versus cystectomy: recurrence of endometriosis and pregnancy rate. Arch Gynecol Obstet 290(1):163–167\nFerrero S, Venturini PL, Gillott DJ, Remorgida V, Maggiore ULR (2012) Hemostasis by bipolar coagulation versus suture after surgical stripping of bilateral ovarian endometriomas: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 19(6):722–730\nToner JP, Seifer DB (2013) Why we may abandon basal follicle-stimulating hormone testing: a sea change in determining ovarian reserve using antimüllerian hormone. Fertil Steril 99(7):1825–1830\nFedele L, Bianchi S, Zanconato G, Bergamini V, Berlanda N (2004) Bipolar electrocoagulation versus suture of solitary ovary after laparoscopic excision of ovarian endometriomas. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11(3):344–347\nZaitoun MM, Zaitoun MM, El Behery MM (2013) Comparing long term impact on ovarian reserve between laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy and open laprotomy for ovarian endometrioma. J Ovarian Res 6:76\nMohamed ML, Nouh AA, El-Behery MM, Mansour SA-A (2011) Effect on ovarian reserve of laparoscopic bipolar electrocoagulation versus laparotomic hemostatic sutures during unilateral ovarian cystectomy. Int J Gynecol Obstet 114(1):69–72\nSugita A, Iwase A, Goto M, Nakahara T, Nakamura T, Kondo M, Osuka S, Mori M, Saito A, Kikkawa F (2013) One-year follow-up of serum antimüllerian hormone levels in patients with cystectomy: are different sequential changes due to different mechanisms causing damage to the ovarian reserve? Fertil Steril 100(2):516–522.e3\nAlborzi S, Keramati P, Younesi M, Samsami A, Dadras N (2014) The impact of laparoscopic cystectomy on ovarian reserve in patients with unilateral and bilateral endometriomas. Fertil Steril 101(2):427–434\nSong T, Lee S-H, Kim WY (2014) Additional benefit of hemostatic sealant in preservation of ovarian reserve during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy: a multi-center, randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 29(8):1659–1665\nAcknowledgments\nFinancial support was provided by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.\nEthical standards\nThe study was registered in Iranian Registry of clinical Trial (www.IRCT.ir) by the number of IRCT201403088897N2.\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nAsgari, Z., Rouholamin, S., Hosseini, R. et al. Comparing ovarian reserve after laparoscopic excision of endometriotic cysts and hemostasis achieved either by bipolar coagulation or suturing: a randomized clinical trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 293, 1015–1022 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3918-4\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3918-4","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}