Hemostasis During Ovarian Cystectomy: Systematic Review of the Impact of Suturing Versus Surgical Energy on Ovarian Function

Ann Peters, Noah Rindos, Ted Lee
In: Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology · 2016 · vol. 24(2) , pp. 235–246 · doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2016.12.009 · PMID:28011097 · W2563259770
review OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 17 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This systematic review compares the impact of suturing versus surgical energy on ovarian function during hemostasis in ovarian cystectomy procedures.

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

Abstract

This systematic review compares the effect of suturing and surgical energy used for hemostasis during ovarian cystectomies on ovarian function. A search of Scopus, Embase, and PubMed databases was conducted through December 1, 2016 for prospective, retrospective, and randomized controlled trials that analyzed ovarian function after ovarian cystectomies where hemostasis was obtained using suturing versus surgical energy. Of the 25 studies identified, 12 with a total of 1133 subjects met the criteria and were included in this review. Analysis of the pooled data strongly supports the use of suturing rather than surgical energy (bipolar or ultrasonic coagulation) for hemostasis, because it provides improved preservation of ovarian function at the time of cystectomy. Four of 8 ovarian reserve markers (anti-Müllerian hormone, antral follicle count, peak systolic velocity, and ovarian volume) demonstrated a positive association using suturing, whereas the remainder of ovarian markers showed a positive trend toward suturing or noninferiority to bipolar energy. In conclusion, suturing for hemostasis after ovarian cystectomy is superior to surgical energy in preserving ovarian function. Further studies are needed to assess whether this difference is clinically relevant in regards to fertility and premature ovarian failure. (USPSTF Level II-1 Evidence).

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 (33)

Cited by (18)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-25T06:33:09.130943+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK