Minimally invasive gynecologic procedures

Jacques Donnez, Jean Squifflet, Olivier Donnez
Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2011 · vol. 23(4) , pp. 289–295 · doi:10.1097/gco.0b013e328348a283 · PMID:21666466 · W1978035893
review OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 9 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This review evaluates surgical options for endometriomas, highlighting a combined technique that preserves ovarian volume and follicle count, addressing concerns about ovarian reserve and malignancy risk.

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

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate different surgical options for the treatment of endometriomas. A heated debate is currently under way between advocates of excisional surgery and the ablative approach. With papers increasingly focusing on ovarian reserve after endometrioma surgery, a review was mandatory. RECENT FINDINGS: Excisional and ablative surgery are well known procedures. This paper describes a combined technique that allows preservation of ovarian volume and antral follicle count. The question of postoperative ovarian reserve is widely discussed and the risk of malignancy is addressed. SUMMARY: Some previously published reviews have probably too hastily concluded that excision is a better option than ablation. They failed to analyze the ovarian reserve, which is often significantly decreased after excisional surgery.This manuscript clearly explains the crucial importance of preserving the ovarian blood supply, as well as the ovarian cortex containing all primordial follicles, during surgery.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosisendometrioma

MeSH descriptors

Ablation Techniques Endometriosis Laparoscopy Ovarian Diseases Ovarian Neoplasms Sclerotherapy Endometriosis Endometriosis Female Humans Laparoscopy Ovarian Diseases Ovarian Neoplasms Ovary Ovary

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 (36)

Cited by (9)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-11T06:19:48.454388+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:16:42.478857+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK