Case selection for urological input in planned laparoscopic rectovaginal endometriosis surgery.

G Fisher, Daron Smith, R D Smith, E Saridogan, Ertan Sarıdoğan, Arvind Vashisht, A Vashisht, S Allen, V Arumuham, Arumuham, Alfred Cutner, A Cutner
Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2019 · vol. 11(2) , pp. 111–117 · PMID:31824632 · W2996839300
article OA: green CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-10 ⓘ

This study identified pre-operative risk factors and developed a scoring system to predict the need for urological input during laparoscopic rectovaginal endometriosis surgery.

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

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgery for deep endometriosis often requires input from urological surgeons. This study aims to determine pre-operative and intra-operative factors that influence the need for urological input in laparoscopic resection of rectovaginal endometriosis and to assess the usefulness of a scoring system to predict this. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 230 patients undergoing laparoscopic excision of deep endometriosis, at a tertiary referral centre for endometriosis in London UK, 2011 to 2015. Data from pre-operative assessment, surgery and post-operative follow up were analysed and patients were categorised according to their pre-operative and intra-operative risk factors. The primary outcome measure was the requirement of intra-operative input by urological surgeons. RESULTS: The median age was 35 years. In addition to the excision of endometriosis, 19.6% patients (45 patients) underwent hysterectomy, 14.8% (34 patients) required JJ stent placement, 6.1% (14 patients) had bowel resections and 2.6% (6 patients) required an ileostomy. 93.9% (216 patients) were considered normal-risk pre-operatively, of whom 89.4% (193/216) did not require any intra-operative urological input. 10.6% of this normal-risk group (23/216) required JJ stents, of whom 69.6% (16/23) also required a hysterectomy or bowel resection. Post operative complications occurred in 0.9% (2/216) of normal-risk patients, with none having required intra-operative urological reconstruction.Six percent (14 patients) were deemed to be increased-risk pre-operatively, of whom 78.6% (11/14) required JJ stent insertion. Thirty-six percent of increased-risk patients (5/14) had pre-operative renal dysfunction demonstrated on MAG3/DMSA and 80.0% of these (4/5) required intra-operative ureteric reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients considered normal-risk pre-operatively, planned for excision, without hysterectomy or bowel resection, can be safely managed without specific urology input. Patients with risk-features are highly likely to require urological input, particularly for JJ stent insertion. Patients with pre-operative renal dysfunction, demonstrated on MAG3/DMSA, have a high chance of requiring intra-operative ureteric reconstruction and are best managed with pre-planned reconstructive urologist input.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosisbowel_endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

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. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (18)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:22:22.912744+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK