4.7 Article

Does the learning curve of conservative laparoscopic surgery in women with rectovaginal endometriosis impair the recurrence rate?

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 92, Issue 3, Pages 868-875

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.07.1738

Keywords

Endometriosis; laparoscopic surgery; learning curve; rectovaginal endometriosis; recurrence rate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To assess the effect of surgeon's increasing experience in conservative laparoscopic surgery of women with rectovaginal endometriosis on the surgical outcome of these patients recurrence rate. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: University teaching hospital. Patient(s): The first 60 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic conservative surgery for symptomatic rectovaginal endometriosis at our institution during a 4-year period. Intervention(s): Cases were classified into two groups according to the date of the patient's operation: the first 30 cases were defined as the early cases and the subsequent 30 cases as the late cases. Main Outcome Measure(s): Operating time, perioperative complications, and surgical outcome. Univariate and multivariate analyses for risk factors with recurrence of disease. Result(s): The two groups were similar in patient characteristics. There was a reduction in the rate of laparoconversion, operating time, estimated amount of blood loss, cases with incomplete removal, and recurrence rate with increasing surgeon's experience. Surgical completeness was significantly associated with recurrence of disease. Conclusion(s): A learning curve is demonstrated in the conservative laparoscopic management of patients with rectovaginal endometriosis. After gaining experience in performing 30 cases, the recurrence rate is significantly reduced. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;92:868-75. (C)2009 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available