Long-term Outcomes Following Surgical Management of Rectal Endometriosis: Seven-year Follow-up of Patients Enrolled in a Randomized Trial

Horace Roman, Emmanuel Huet, Huet E, Valérie Bridoux, Bridoux V, Haitham Khalil, Khalil H, Clotilde Hennetier, Hennetier C, Bubenheim M, Michael Bubenheim, Michaël Bubenheim, Sophia Braund, Braund S, Tuech JJ, Jean-Jacques Tuech, Jean–Jacques Tuech
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology · 2022 · vol. 29(6) , pp. 767–775 · doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2022.02.007 · PMID:35181523 · W4213052758
RCT OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 22 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This randomized trial followed patients with rectal endometriosis for seven years to assess long-term outcomes after surgical management.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare functional outcomes, recurrence rate, and pregnancy likelihood in patients undergoing conservative or radical surgery for deep rectal endometriosis followed up for 7 years. DESIGN: Prospective study in a cohort of patients enrolled in a 2-arm randomized trial from March 2011 to August 2013. SETTING: A tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Fifty-five patients with deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectum. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent either segmental resection or nodule excision via shaving or disk excision, depending on randomization that was performed preoperatively using sequentially numbered, opaque sealed envelopes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was the number of patients experiencing one of the following symptoms: constipation, frequent bowel movements, anal incontinence, or bladder dysfunction 24 months after surgery. The secondary end points were values of gastrointestinal and overall quality of life scores. The 7-year recurrence rates (new deep endometriosis nodules infiltrating the rectum) in the excision vs segmental resection arms were 7.4 % vs 0% (p = .24). One of the symptoms included in the definition of the primary outcomes was recorded in 55.6% vs 60.7% of patients (p = .79). However, 51.9% vs 53.6% of patients considered their bowel movements as normal (p = .99). An intention-to-treat comparison of overall quality of life scores did not find a difference between the 2 groups 7 years after surgery. At the end of the 7-year study period, 31 of 37 patients who tried to conceive were successful (83.8%), including 27 pregnancies (57.4%) resulting from natural conception and 20 pregnancies (42.6%) resulting from assisted reproductive technology procedures. The pregnancy rate was 82.4% vs 85% in the 2 arms (p = .99). A 75.7% live birth rate was recorded. At the end of the follow-up, there were 15 women with 1 child (40.5%) and 13 women with 2 children (35.1%). During the 7-year follow-up, the reoperation rates were 37% and 35.7%, respectively, in each arm (p = .84). Among the 27 reoperation procedures during the follow-up period, 11 (40.7%) were for postoperative complications, 7 (25.9%) were necessary before assisted reproductive technology management, 8 (29.6%) were for recurrent abdominal or pelvic pain, and 1 (3.7%) was for midline ventral hernia after pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Our study did not reveal a considerable difference in terms of digestive functional outcomes, recurrence rate, reoperation risk, and pregnancy likelihood when conservative and radical rectal surgeries for deep endometriosis were compared 7 years after surgery. The postoperative pregnancy rate observed in our series was high.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Digestive System Surgical Procedures Digestive System Surgical Procedures Digestive System Surgical Procedures Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Laparoscopy Laparoscopy Laparoscopy Rectal Diseases Rectal Diseases Rectal Diseases Child Child Female Female Follow-Up Studies Follow-Up Studies Humans Humans

Citation neighborhood (2-hop)

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]

References (31)

Cited by (28)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-10-12T06:17:10.165071+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:34:07.010134+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-10-12T06:33:14.382917+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK