{"paper_id":"dce645d7-cd70-4b95-be6b-026677a07e3d","body_text":"Abstract\nThe aim of the present study was to determine the long-term effects of different laparoscopic hemostatic techniques on ovarian reserve after ovarian cystectomy. Ninety patients with unilateral ovarian cysts were recruited and randomly distributed into 2 groups. Laparoscopic stripping cystectomy was performed in all patients. Afterward, cystectomy hemostasis was achieved via hemostatic suture or bipolar electrocoagulation. Serum levels of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) were determined preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, and 12 months, and patients were evaluated for residual ovarian volume, antral follicle count, and pregnancy. The statistical difference was determined between the 2 groups in terms of AMH levels at 3 months (hemostatic suture group = 3.17 ± 3.40 vs bipolar electrocoagulation group = 2.38 ± 2.57, P =.006) and 12 months (hemostatic suture group = 3.71 ± 3.09 vs bipolar electrocoagulation group = 2.78 ± 2.85, P =.005). In addition, in the hemostatic suture group, there was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative AMH levels (P =.165) and between the postoperative antral follicle count (P =.779) and the residual ovarian volume (P =.248), whereas in the bipolar electrocoagulation group, postoperative AMH levels were lower than preoperative levels (P =.028) and postoperative residual ovarian volumes at 3 and 12 months were lower than those at 1 month (P =.001). Nonetheless, pregnancy rates were not significantly different (P =.546). Bipolar electrocoagulation is more destructive compared with hemostatic suture. However, the ovarian reserve does not decrease further during the follow-up period.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nBorgfeldt C, Andolf E. Transvaginal sonographic ovarian findings in a random sample of women 25-40 years old. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999;13(5):345–350.\nBrun JL, Fritel X, Aubard Y, et al. Management of presumed benign ovarian tumors: updated French guidelines. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;183:52–58.\nTsolakidis D, Pados G, Vavilis D, et al. The impact on ovarian reserve after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy versus three-stage management in patients with endometriomas: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):71–77.\nHirokawa W, Iwase A, Goto M, et al. The post-operative decline in serum anti-Mullerian hormone correlates with the bilaterality and severity of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(1):904–910.\nDan H, Limin F. Laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy versus fenestration/coagulation or laser vaporization for the treatment of endometriomas: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2013;76(2):75–82.\nCanis M, Pouly JL, Tamburro S, Mage G, Wattiez A, Bruhat MA. Ovarian response during IVF-embryo transfer cycles after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy for endometriotic cysts of >3 cm in diameter. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(12):2583–2586.\nBusacca M, Riparini J, Somigliana E, et al. Postsurgical ovarian failure after laparoscopic excision of bilateral endometriomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(2):421–425.\nDi Prospero F, Micucci G. Is operative laparoscopy safe in ovarian endometriosis? Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;18(2):167.\nHwu YM, Wu FS, Li SH, Sun FJ, Lin MH, Lee RK. The impact of endometrioma and laparoscopic cystectomy on serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2011;9:80.\nHart RJ, Hickey M, Maouris P, Buckett W. Excisional surgery versus ablative surgery for ovarian endometriomata. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD004992.\nSong T, Lee SH, Kim WY. Additional benefit of hemostatic sealant in preservation of ovarian reserve during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy: a multi-center, randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(8):1659–1665.\nCoric M, Barisic D, Pavicic D, Karadza M, Banovic M. Electrocoagulation versus suture after laparoscopic stripping of ovarian endometriomas assessed by antral follicle count: preliminary results of randomized clinical trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283(2):373–378.\nÖzgönen H, Erdemoglu E, Günyeli I, Güney M, Mungan T. Comparison of the effects of laparoscopic bipolar electrocoagulation and intracorporeal suture application to ovarian reserve in benign ovarian cysts. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(4):729–732.\nSong T, Kim WY, Lee KW, Kim KH. Effect on ovarian reserve of hemostasis by bipolar coagulation versus suture during laparoendoscopic single-site cystectomy for ovarian endometriomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(3):415–420.\nErcan CM, Duru NK, Karasahin KE, Coksuer H, Dede M, Baser I. Ultrasonographic evaluation and anti-Mullerian hormone levels after laparoscopic stripping of unilateral endometriomas. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;158(2):280–284.\nVural B, Cakiroglu Y, Vural F, Filiz S. Hormonal and functional biomarkers in ovarian response. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;289(6):1355–1361.\nFerrero S, Venturini PL, Gillott DJ, Remorgida V, Leone Roberti Maggiore U. Hemostasis by bipolar coagulation versus suture after surgical stripping of bilateral ovarian endometriomas: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012;19(6):722–730.\nCandiani M, Barbieri M, Bottani B, et al. Ovarian recovery after laparoscopic enucleation of ovarian cysts: insights from echographic short-term postsurgical follow-up. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005;12(5):409–414.\nBeretta P, Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Busacca M, Zupi E, Bolis P. Randomized clinical trial of two laparoscopic treatments of endometriomas: cystectomy versus drainage and coagulation. Fertil Steril. 1998;70(6):1176–1180.\nDilek U, Pata O, Tataroglu C, Aban M, Dilek S. Excision of endometriotic cyst wall may cause loss of functional ovarian tissue. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(3):758–760.\nSomigliana E, Berlanda N, Benaglia L, Viganò P, Vercellini P, Fedele L. Surgical excision of endometriomas and ovarian reserve: a systematic review on serum antimüllerian hormone level modifications. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(6):1531–1538.\nRagni G, Somigliana E, Benedetti F, et al. Damage to ovarian reserve associated with laparoscopic excision of endometriomas: a quantitative rather than a qualitative injury. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(6):1908–1914.\nMuzii L, Bianchi A, Crocè C, Manci N, Panici PB. Laparoscopic excision of ovarian cysts: is the stripping technique a tissue-sparing procedure? Fertil Steril. 2002;77(3):609–614.\nManeschi F, Marasá L, Incandela S, Mazzarese M, Zupi E. Ovarian cortex surrounding benign neoplasms: a histologic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169(2 pt 1):388–393.\nSeyhan A, Ata B, Uncu G. The impact of endometriosis and its treatment on ovarian reserve. Semin Reprod Med. 2015;33(6):422–428.\nMuzii L, Bellati F, Bianchi A, et al. Laparoscopic stripping of endometriomas: a randomized trial on different surgical techniques. Part II: pathological results. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(7):1987–1992.\nYu HT, Huang HY, Soong YK, Lee CL, Chao A, Wang CJ. Laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy of endometriomas: surgeons’ experience may affect ovarian reserve and live-born rate in infertile patients with in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;152(2):172–175.\nDonnez J, Lousse JC, Jadoul P, Donnez O, Squifflet J. Laparoscopic management of endometriomas using a combined technique of excisional (cystectomy) and ablative surgery. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):28–32.\nAta B, Turkgeldi E, Seyhan A, Urman B. Effect of hemostatic method on ovarian reserve following laparoscopic endometrioma excision; comparison of suture, hemostatic sealant, and bipolar dessication. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(3):363–372.\nMohamed ML, Nouh AA, El-Behery MM, Mansour SA. Effect on ovarian reserve of laparoscopic bipolar electrocoagulation versus laparotomic hemostatic sutures during unilateral ovarian cystectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;114(1):69–72.\nFedele L, Bianchi S, Zanconato G, Bergamini V, Berlanda N. Bipolar electrocoagulation versus suture of solitary ovary after laparoscopic excision of ovarian endometriomas. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004;11(3):344–347.\nFerrero S, Venturini PL, Gillott DJ, Remorgida V, Leone Roberti Maggiore U. Hemostasis by bipolar coagulation versus suture after surgical stripping of bilateral ovarian endometriomas: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012;19(6):722–730.\nLi CZ, Liu B, Wen ZQ, Sun Q. The impact of electrocoagulation on ovarian reserve after laparoscopic excision of ovarian cysts: a prospective clinical study of 191 patients. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(4):1428–1435.\nHansen KR, Hodnett GM, Knowlton N, Craig LB. Correlation of ovarian reserve tests with histologically determined primordial follicle number. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(1):170–175.\nPacchiarotti A, Frati P, Milazzo GN, Catalano A, Gentile V, Moscarini M. Evaluation of serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels to assess the ovarian reserve in women with severe endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;172:62–64.\nShah DK. Diminished ovarian reserve and endometriosis: insult upon injury. Semin Reprod Med. 2013;31(2):144–149.\nVercellini P, DE Matteis S, Somigliana E, Buggio L, Frattaruolo MP, Fedele L. Long-term adjuvant therapy for the prevention of postoperative endometrioma recurrence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(1):8–16.\nDewailly D, Andersen CY, Balen A, et al. The physiology and clinical utility of anti-Mullerian hormone in women. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(3):370–385.\nTakashima A, Takeshita N, Otaka K, Kinoshita T. 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. 2013;39(7):1246–1252.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nSahin, C., Akdemir, A., Ergenoglu, A.M. et al. Which Should Be the Preferred Technique During Laparoscopic Ovarian Cystectomy: Hemostatic Sutures or Bipolar Electrocoagulation? A Randomized Controlled Prospective Study of Long-Term Ovarian Reserve. Reprod. Sci. 24, 393–399 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719116657195\nPublished:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719116657195","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}