Impact of hemostatic methods on ovarian reserve and fertility in laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy

Jie Xiao, Jian Zhou, Hui Liang, Fumin Liu, Chenchen Xu, Liang Li
In: Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine · 2019 · vol. 17(4) , pp. 2689–2693 · doi:10.3892/etm.2019.7259 · PMID:30906458 · W2911777781
article OA: diamond CC0 ⤵ 8 in-corpus citations
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

Laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy using hemostatic electrocoagulation negatively impacted ovarian reserve more than hemostatic suture, evidenced by significant decreases in E2, AMH, and AFC.

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

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-10 ⓘ

This prospective randomized study evaluated how hemostatic technique during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy affects ovarian reserve, comparing bipolar electrocoagulation versus suturing in 80 women with bilateral ovarian cysts. Serum FSH, LH, estradiol, and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) were measured before surgery and at 1 and 6 months, alongside vaginal ultrasound assessments of antral follicle count (AFC) and ovarian stromal blood flow (peak systolic velocity); the authors followed patients for pregnancy for 24 months. Electrocoagulation produced greater declines in E2 and AMH and larger increases in FSH at 1 and 6 months, with AFC and PSV significantly worse in the electrocoagulation group at 6 months, and some apparent partial recovery by that time. The paper includes the explicitly stated limitation that fertility outcomes were assessed via follow-up but does not provide detailed pregnancy/offspring results in the provided text. This paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Impact of hemostatic methods, electrocoagulation versus suture, on ovarian reserve and fertility in laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy was investigated. Eighty patients with bilateral ovarian cysts who underwent laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy were randomly divided into 2 groups based on the hemostatic methods: 40 in suture group and another 40 in electrocoagulation group. Blood samples were drawn from all patients at roughly three time points: Before the surgery, 1 month and 6 months after the surgery. Radioimmunoassay was performed to measure the serum levels of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol (E2) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH). Moreover, the vaginal ultrasound examination was performed to obtain the ovarian size, peak systolic velocity (PSV) of ovarian stromal blood flow, and antral follicle count (AFC). In terms of postoperative ovarian reserve, the levels of E2 and AMH slightly decreased while the FSH level slightly increased in the suture group at both 1 and 6 months after surgery. In the electrocoagulation group, however, the levels of E2 and AMH decreased significantly while the FSH level increased significantly at 1 month after surgery. Six months after surgery, these levels all returned slightly showing some recovery of ovarian reserve. In comparison between the suture group and the electrocoagulation group, the differences in levels of E2, FSH and AMH were all statistically significant at both 1 and 6 months after surgery (P<0.05). Six months after surgery, the differences in AFC and PSV between the suture group and the electrocoagulation group were statistically significant (P<0.05). In laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy, hemostatic electrocoagulation had a more negative impact on ovarian reserve than hemostatic suture. The use of electrocoagulation for hemostasis should be minimized during the operation, and the suture method should be adopted for hemostasis and shaping of the ovarian wound.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

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 (11)

Cited by (8)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK