Keep your attention closer to the ureters: Ureterolysis in deep endometriosis surgery.

Endometriosis surgery involving the ureter poses significant challenges requiring meticulous surgical techniques and vigilant postoperative care. This chapter addresses key aspects of ureterolysis techniques, intraoperative management of ureteral injuries, and postoperative care in the context of endometriosis surgery. Ureterolysis methods aim to isolate and mobilize the ureter while preserving its vascularity. Cold instruments and careful dissection are recommended to prevent thermal injury during surgery. Intraoperative tools such as indocyanine green (ICG) show promise in assessing for vascular compromise. Over half of ureteral injuries are detected postoperatively, necessitating a high index of suspicion. Optimal postoperative care in the case of ureteral injury involves Foley catheterization for decompression, ureteral stenting, and meticulous follow-ups to monitor healing and renal function. While advances have been made in surgical techniques and diagnostic tools, gaps persist in preoperative imaging optimization and predictive models for identifying at-risk patients. This chapter aims to bridge existing knowledge gaps, optimize surgical practices, and enhance the overall care and outcomes of patients undergoing endometriosis surgery involving the ureter.

Favorable surgical and obstetrical outcomes in pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage: a large multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical incompetence is an important cause of extremely preterm delivery. Without specialized treatment, cervical incompetence has a 30% chance of recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy. Recently, the first randomized controlled trial showed significant superiority of abdominal cerclage compared with both high and low vaginal cerclage in preventing preterm delivery at <32 weeks of gestation and fetal loss in patients with a previous failed vaginal cerclage. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess surgical and obstetrical outcomes in patients with pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage placement. Furthermore, it also aimed to perform subgroup analysis based on the indication for cerclage placement in order to identify patients who benefit the most from an abdominal cerclage. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter cohort study with consecutive inclusion of all eligible patients from 1997 onward in the Dutch cohort (104 patients) and from 2007 onward in the Boston cohort (169 patients) was conducted. Eligible patients had at least 1 second- or third-trimester fetal loss due to cervical incompetence and/or a short or absent cervix after cervical surgery. This includes loop electrosurgical excision procedure, conization, or trachelectomy. Patients were divided into the following subgroups based on the indication for cerclage placement: (1) previous failed vaginal cerclage, (2) previous cervical surgery, and (3) other indications. The third group consisted of patients with a history of multiple second- or early third-trimester fetal losses due to cervical incompetence (without a failed vaginal cerclage) and/or multiple dilation and curettage procedures. The primary outcome measure was delivery at ≥34 weeks of gestation with neonatal survival at hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included surgical and obstetrical outcomes, such as pregnancy rates after preconceptional surgery, obstetrical complications, and fetal survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 273 patients were included (250 in the preconceptional and 23 in the postconceptional cohort). Surgical outcomes of 273 patients were favorable, with 6 minor complications (2.2%). In the postconceptional cohort, 1 patient (0.4%) had hemorrhage of 650 mL, resulting in conversion to laparotomy. After preconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage (n=250), the pregnancy rate was 74.1% (n=137) with a minimal follow-up of 12 months. Delivery at ³34 weeks of gestation occurred in 90.5% of all ongoing pregnancies. Four patients (3.3%) had a second-trimester fetal loss. The indication for cerclage in all 4 patients was a previous failed vaginal cerclage. The other subgroups showed fetal survival rates of 100% in ongoing pregnancies, with a total fetal survival rate of 96%. After postconceptional placement, 94.1% of all patients with an ongoing pregnancy delivered at ³34 weeks of gestation, with a total fetal survival rate of 100%. Thus, second-trimester fetal losses did not occur in this group. CONCLUSION: Pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage is a safe procedure with favorable obstetrical outcomes in patients with increased risk of cervical incompetence. All subgroups showed high fetal survival rates. Second-trimester fetal loss only occurred in the group of patients with a cerclage placed for the indication of previous failed vaginal cerclage, but was nevertheless rare even in this group.

Evaluation and Management of Endometriosis in the Adolescent.

Endometriosis is a chronic condition, with debilitating symptoms affecting all ages. Dysmenorrhea and pelvic pain often begin in adolescence, affecting school, daily activities, and relationships. Despite the profound burden of endometriosis, many adolescents experience suboptimal management and significant delay in diagnosis. The symptomatology and laparoscopic findings of endometriosis in adolescents are often different than in adults, and the medical and surgical treatments for adolescents may differ from those for adults as well. This Narrative Review summarizes the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of endometriosis in adolescents. Given the unique challenges and complexities associated with diagnosing endometriosis in this age group, it is crucial to maintain a heightened level of suspicion and to remain vigilant for signs and symptoms. By maintaining this lower threshold for consideration, we can ensure timely and accurate diagnosis, enabling early intervention and improved management in our adolescent patients.

Uterine rupture and factors associated with adverse outcomes.

PURPOSE: To review cases of uterine rupture and identify risk factors associated with adverse outcomes. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort of complete uterine ruptures diagnosed in a large hospital system in Massachusetts between 2004 and 2018. Baseline demographics, labor characteristics and outcomes of uterine rupture were collected from medical records. RESULTS: A total of 173 cases of uterine rupture were identified. There were 30 (17.3%) women with an unscarred uterus, while 142 (82.1%) had a scarred uterus. Adverse outcomes (n = 89, 51.4% of cases) included 26 (15.0%) hysterectomies, 55 (31.8%) blood transfusions, 18 (10.4%) bladder/ureteral injuries, 5 (2.9%) reoperations, 25 (14.5%) Apgar scores lower than 5 at 5 min and 9 (5.2%) perinatal deaths. Uterine rupture of a scarred uterus was associated with decreased risk of hemorrhage (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.93), blood transfusion (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.69), hysterectomy (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.69) and any adverse outcome (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.91) compared with unscarred rupture. Uterine rupture during vaginal delivery was associated with increased risk of transfusion (OR 6.55, 95% CI 1.53-28.05) and hysterectomy (OR 8.95, 95% CI 2.12-37.72) compared with emergent C-section. CONCLUSIONS: Although rare, uterine rupture is associated with adverse outcomes in over half of cases. Unscarred rupture and vaginal delivery demonstrate increased risk of adverse outcomes, highlighting the need for early diagnosis and operative intervention.

Very Low Rates of Ureteral Injury in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Performed by Fellowship-trained Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgeons.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this case series is to evaluate the rates of ureteral injury at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy among high-volume fellowship-trained surgeons. DESIGN: A retrospective chart review was performed, evaluating laparoscopic hysterectomy cases between 2009 and 2019 performed exclusively by fellowship-trained surgeons. SETTING: Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (MIGS) at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Brigham and Women's Faulkner Hospital, a Harvard Medical School teaching hospital in Boston. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy by one of 5 surgeons with fellowship training in MIGS. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 5160 cases were handled by MIGS surgeons between 2009 and 2019 at our institution. Of these cases, 2345 were laparoscopic hysterectomy cases with available intraoperative and postoperative documentation. Most patients had undergone previous surgeries, and the most common indications for hysterectomy included uterine myomas, pelvic pain/endometriosis, and abnormal uterine bleeding. At the time of hysterectomy, 1 ureteral injury (0.04%) was noted. No additional delayed ureteral injuries were observed. Most patients were discharged home the same day (64.9%) and did not have any postoperative complications (63.9%) as designated by the Clavien-Dindo classification. CONCLUSION: Ureteral injury, although rare, is more prevalent in gynecologic surgery than in other surgical disciplines that have some focus on the pelvis. No study to date has evaluated the effect of surgical training and volume on rates of ureteral injuries. This study retrospectively examined ureteral injury rates for one group of high-volume fellowship-trained surgeons and found their rates to be lower than the national average. Proposals are presented for optimizing training and delivery of gynecologic surgical care to minimize complications.

Deep Pelvic Side Wall Anatomy: A Case of Laparoscopic Management of Vaginal Vault Fistula to the Presacral Area.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Video presentation showing retroperitoneal dissection and deep pelvic side wall anatomy [1-3]. DESIGN: Case presentation with showing anatomic structures in detail. SETTING: Tertiary academic teaching hospital. INTERVENTIONS: A 74-year-old female with history of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and a vaginal hysterectomy with left sacrospinous ligament suspension 9 years ago presented with fever and was found to have bacteremia. Abdomen and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging showed a presacral and precoccygeal loculated collections, sacral osteomyelitis, and fistula from the left superior vaginal vault to one of the presacral collections. Transgluteal drain placed with cultures growing Streptococcus constellatus and Gemella morbillorum. Blood cultures grew same bacteria. She was started on vancomycin, cefepime, and metronidazole and was transitioned to ceftriaxone with a plan for 6-week antibiotic course. Her blood sugar levels were well controlled during hospitalization with baseline insulin and moderate sliding scale. Physical therapy started preoperative and continued postoperative. She was managed with an interdisciplinary team of gynecologists, urogynecologists, orthopedic doctors, neurosurgeons, nutritionists, infectious disease doctors, endocrinologists, hematologists, rehabilitation specialists, and physical therapists. This video showcases laparoscopic resection of sacrospinous fistula tract. Postoperative pathology result showed squamous mucosa, submucosa, and deep soft tissue with a submucosal abscess surrounded by fibrosis, consistent with a fistula tract. CONCLUSION: Preoperative planning is of paramount importance in cases with multiple comorbidities. Gentle dissection with maintained hemostasis, creating windows, and starting from less distorted anatomy are key points in retroperitoneal dissection. Knowing the precise anatomy of critical structures close to the area of interest is crucial.

Endometriosis Classification Systems: An International Survey to Map Current Knowledge and Uptake.

OBJECTIVE: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed, but do clinicians routinely use these classification systems, which system do they use and what are the clinicians' motivations? DATA SOURCES: A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. Of particular focus were three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed by SPSS. A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardized reporting, and is clinically relevant and simple. The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system. CONCLUSION: Even with a high uptake of the existing endometriosis classification systems (rASRM, ENZIAN and EFI), most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis.

Endometriosis classification systems: an international survey to map current knowledge and uptake.

STUDY QUESTION: Which classification system for endometriosis do clinicians use most frequently, and why? SUMMARY ANSWER: Even with a high uptake of the three existing endometriosis classification systems, most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In the field of endometriosis, several classifications, staging and reporting systems have been developed and published, but there are no data on the uptake of these systems in clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. The particular focus was on the three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the endometriosis fertility index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed to detect statistically significant differences among user groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynaecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, while the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The vast majority of respondents replied positively to the question on whether they would use a simple surgical descriptive system available for endometriosis, if available. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: While the total number of respondents was acceptable, some regions/professions were not sufficiently represented to draw conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardized reporting and is clinically relevant and simple. The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings and activities of the working group were funded by the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy, ESHRE and World Endometriosis Society. A.W.H. reports grant funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Standard Life, and consultancy fees from Roche Diagnostics, AbbVie, Nordic Pharma and Ferring, outside the submitted work. In addition, A.W.H. has a patent Serum biomarker for endometriosis pending. He is Chair of TSC for STOP-OHSS and CERM trials and Chair of RCOG Academic Board 2018-2021. M.A. reports being member of the executive board and vice president of AAGL. N.P.J. reports personal fees from Abbott, Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Vifor Pharma, Roche Diagnostics outside the submitted work; he is also President of the World Endometriosis Society and chair of the trust board. S.M. reports grants from AbbVie, DoD, NIH and Marriot Family Foundation, honoraria from University British Columbia and WERF, support for speaking at conferences (ESHRE, CanSAGE, Endometriosis UK, UEARS, IFFS, IASP, National Endometriosis Network UK) participation on Advisory Boards from AbbVie and Roche, outside the submitted work. She also discloses having a leadership or fiduciary role in SWHR, WERF, WES, ASRM and ESHRE. C.T. reports grants, consulting and speakers' fees non-financial support and other from Merck SA, non-financial support and other consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Nordic Pharma, and support for meeting attendance non-financial support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work and without private revenue. K.T.Z. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare, MDNA Life Sciences, Volition Rx, and Evotec (Lab282-Partnership programme with Oxford University), non-financial support from AbbVie Ltd, all outside the submitted work; and is a Board member (Secretary) of the World Endometriosis Society and World Endometriosis Research Foundation. J.P. reports personal fees from Hologic, Inc., outside the submitted work; he is also a member of the executive boards of ASRM and SRS. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

An International Terminology for Endometriosis, 2021.

OBJECTIVE: Different classification systems have been developed for endometriosis, using different definitions for the disease, the different subtypes, symptoms and treatments. In addition, an International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care has been published in 2017 by the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) in collaboration with other organisations. An international working group convened over the development of a classification or descriptive system for endometriosis. As a basis for such system, a terminology for endometriosis was considered a condition sine qua non. The aim of the current study was to develop a set of terms and definitions be prepared on endometriosis that would be the basis for standardization in disease description, classification and research. DATA SOURCES: The working group listed a number of terms relevant to be included in the terminology, documented currently used and published definitions, and discussed and adapted them until consensus was reached within the working group. Following stakeholder review, further terms were added, and definitions further clarified. Although definitions were collected through published literature, the final set of terms and definitions is to be considered consensus-based. After finalization of the first draft, the members of the international societies and other stakeholders were consulted for feedback and comments, which lead to further adaptations. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: A list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis is presented, including a definition for endometriosis and its subtypes, different locations, interventions, symptoms and outcomes. Endometriosis is defined as a disease characterized by the presence of endometrium-like epithelium and/or stroma outside the endometrium and myometrium, usually with an associated inflammatory process. CONCLUSION: The current paper outlines a list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis. The application of the defined terms aims to facilitate harmonization in endometriosis research and clinical practice. Future research may require further refinement of the presented definitions.

Endometriosis Classification, Staging and Reporting Systems: A Review on the Road to a Universally Accepted Endometriosis Classification.

OBJECTIVE: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice? DATA SOURCES: A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose. CONCLUSION: Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated for the purpose for which they were developed. The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered. It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working towards a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

An international terminology for endometriosis, 2021.

STUDY QUESTION: Can a set of terms and definitions be prepared on endometriosis that would be the basis for standardization in disease description, classification and research? SUMMARY ANSWER: The current paper outlines a list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Different classification systems have been developed for endometriosis, using different definitions for the disease, the different subtypes, symptoms and treatments. In addition, an International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care was published in 2017 by the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) in collaboration with other organisations. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: An international working group convened over the development of a classification or descriptive system for endometriosis. As a basis for such a system, a terminology for endometriosis was considered a condition sine qua non. The working group listed a number of terms relevant to be included in the terminology, documented currently used and published definitions, and discussed and adapted them until consensus was reached within the working group. Following stakeholder review, further terms were added, and definitions further clarified. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Although definitions were collected through published literature, the final set of terms and definitions is to be considered consensus-based. After finalization of the first draft, the members of the international societies and other stakeholders were consulted for feedback and comments, which led to further adaptations. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis is presented, including a definition for endometriosis and its subtypes, different locations, interventions, symptoms and outcomes. Endometriosis is defined as a disease characterized by the presence of endometrium-like epithelium and/or stroma outside the endometrium and myometrium, usually with an associated inflammatory process. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Future research may require further refinement of the presented definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The application of the defined terms aims to facilitate harmonization in endometriosis research and clinical practice. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings and activities of the working group were funded by the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and World Endometriosis Society. A.W.H. reports grant funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO, Wellbeing of Women, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Standard Life, Consultancy fees from Roche Diagnostics, AbbVie, Nordic Pharma and Ferring, outside the submitted work. In addition, A.W.H. has a patent Serum biomarker for endometriosis pending. N.P.J. reports personal fees from Abbott, Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Vifor Pharma, Roche Diagnostics outside the submitted work; he is also President of the World Endometriosis Society and chair of the trust board. S.M. reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, and personal fees from Roche outside the submitted work. C.T. reports grants, non-financial support and other from Merck SA, non-financial support and other from Gedeon Richter, non-financial support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work and without private revenue. K.T.Z. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare, MDNA Life Sciences, Roche Diagnostics Inc, Volition Rx, outside the submitted work; she is also a Board member (Secretary) of the World Endometriosis Society and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, Research Advisory Board member of Wellbeing of Women, UK (research charity), and Chair, Research Directions Working Group, World Endometriosis Society. J.P reports personal fees from Hologic, Inc., outside the submitted work; he is also a member of the executive boards of ASRM and SRS. The other authors had nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems: a review on the road to a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

STUDY QUESTION: Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice? SUMMARY ANSWER: Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated, in 46 studies, for the purpose for which they were developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose. LARGE SCALE DATA: NA. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working toward a universally accepted endometriosis classification. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings and activities of the working group were funded by the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and World Endometriosis Society. A.W.H. reports grant funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO, Wellbeing of Women, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Standard Life, Consultancy fees from Roche Diagnostics, AbbVie, Nordic Pharma and Ferring, outside the submitted work. In addition, A.W.H. has a patent Serum biomarker for endometriosis pending. N.P.J. reports personal fees from Abbott, Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Vifor Pharma, Roche Diagnostics, outside the submitted work; he is also President of the World Endometriosis Society and chair of the trust board. S.M. reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, and personal fees from Roche outside the submitted work. C.T. reports grants, non-financial support and other from Merck SA, non-financial support and other from Gedeon Richter, non-financial support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work and without private revenue. K.T.Z. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare, MDNA Life Sciences, Roche Diagnostics Inc, Volition Rx, outside the submitted work; she is also a Board member (Secretary) of the World Endometriosis Society and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, Research Advisory Board member of Wellbeing of Women, UK (research charity), and Chair, Research Directions Working Group, World Endometriosis Society. The other authors had nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NA.

Superior Hypogastric Plexus Block to Reduce Pain After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a superior hypogastric plexus block performed during laparoscopic hysterectomy reduces postoperative pain. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial of superior hypogastric plexus block at the start of laparoscopic hysterectomy. Women undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy for any indication and with any other concomitant laparoscopic procedure were eligible. Standardized preoperative medications and incisional analgesia were provided to all patients. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score lower than 4 within 2 hours postoperatively. Patients but not surgeons were blinded to the treatment group. Twenty-nine patients per group was estimated to be sufficient to detect a 38% absolute difference in the proportion of patients with a VAS score lower than 4 at 2 hours postoperatively, with 80% power and an α of 0.05. To account for loss to follow-up and potential imbalances in patient characteristics, we planned to enroll 50 patients per group. All analyses were intention to treat. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and February 2019, 186 patients were eligible; 100 were randomized and analyzed. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with a mean VAS score lower than 4 within 2 hours postoperatively between patients who received a superior hypogastric plexus block (57%) and patients who did not (43%) (odds ratio 1.63, 95% CI 0.74-3.59; adjusted odds ratio 1.84, 95% CI 0.75-4.51). CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with standardized enhanced perioperative recovery pathways, superior hypogastric plexus block did not significantly reduce postoperative pain. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03283436.

Triaging abnormal cervical cancer screening tests using p16INK4a detection by ELISA on fresh cervical samples.

PROBLEM: Cervical cancer screening strategies in the United States include cotesting (human papillomavirus (HPV) with cytology), primary HPV with genotyping and reflex cytology, and cytology alone. An ongoing challenge is the appropriate triage of patients to colposcopy to those at highest risk. We investigated whether incorporation of p16INK4a immunodetection by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) on fresh cervical samples obtained at the time of screening could improve appropriate referral to colposcopy. METHOD OF STUDY: A derivation group comprised of cervical swabs collected from subjects with high-grade dysplasia or cancer (positive control) and from subjects with negative screening history (negative control). Samples collected from colposcopy were used to evaluate the existing screening strategies individually and with incorporation of p16INK4a ELISA. Histology was used as the gold standard. RESULTS: Among 163 subjects recruited, 138 were included. In the derivation group, mean p16INK4a level was 2.86 ng/mL (n = 31) and 0.58 ng/mL (n = 20) among positive and negative controls respectively (p = 0.002) with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.79 (p < 0.001). Among colposcopy subjects, sensitivity/specificity for cotesting, primary HPV, and cytology were 94%/42%, 88%/45%, and 88%/49%, respectively. Incorporation of p16INK4a resulted in similar sensitivity and improved specificity (cotesting+p16 88%/58%, primary HPV+p16 88%/57%, cytology+p16 81%/62%; p = 0.23/p = 0.008) with decrease in colposcopy referrals by 15% to 22% (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the feasibility of quantifying p16INK4a by ELISA in fresh cervical samples, and its potential as an adjunct to existing screening strategies in the identification of high grade-dysplasia while reducing the number of colposcopic referrals.

Safety of Minimally Invasive Tissue Extraction in Myoma Management: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This review seeks to establish the incidence of adverse outcomes associated with minimally invasive tissue extraction at the time of surgical procedures for myomas. DATA SOURCES: Articles published in the following databases without date restrictions: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Trials. Search was conducted on March 25, 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Included studies evaluated minimally invasive surgical procedures for uterine myomas involving morcellation. This review did not consider studies of nonuterine tissue morcellation, studies involving uterine procedures other than hysterectomy or myomectomy, studies involving morcellation of known malignancies, nor studies concerning hysteroscopic myomectomy. A total of 695 studies were reviewed, with 185 studies included for analysis. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: The following variables were extracted: patient demographics, study type, morcellation technique, and adverse outcome category. Adverse outcomes included prolonged operative time, morcellation time, blood loss, direct injury from a morcellator, dissemination of tissue (benign or malignant), and disruption of the pathologic specimen. CONCLUSION: Complications related to morcellation are rare; however, there is a great need for higher quality studies to evaluate associated adverse outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques for Tissue Extraction.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Morcellation is a technique to remove large specimens by means of small incisions and is commonly used in gynecologic procedures [1]. In this video, we demonstrate contained manual morcellation techniques in benign gynecologic surgeries. DESIGN: Stepwise demonstration of 4 techniques with narrated video footage. SETTING: Tertiary academic teaching hospital. INTERVENTIONS: This video showcases 4 contained manual morcellation techniques: abdominal extraction through an umbilical "mini-laparotomy" incision, abdominal extraction through a suprapubic "mini-laparotomy" incision, transvaginal extraction through the colpotomy, and transvaginal extraction through the posterior cul-de-sac with the uterus in place. A particular strategy should be selected on the basis of appropriate patient characteristics and surgical factors [2]. CONCLUSION: Minimizing risk during tissue extraction is critical to minimally invasive procedures. The morcellation techniques displayed in this video allow for tissue extraction through small incisions while reducing the risk of spreading an undiagnosed malignancy.

Peri- and Postoperative Outcomes of Outpatient vs Inpatient Laparoscopic Apical Prolapse Repair.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of outpatient laparoscopic management of apical pelvic organ prolapse along with indicated vaginal repairs and anti-incontinence procedures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary-care academic center, Boston, MA. PATIENTS: Total of 112 patients seen in the minimally invasive gynecologic surgery and urogynecology clinics with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic hysterectomy, sacrocervico- or sacrocolpopexy along with vaginal prolapse and anti-incontinence procedures as indicated from 2013 to 2017 at Brigham & Women's Hospital and Brigham & Women's Faulkner Hospital performed by a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery and urogynecology team. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 112 patients, 52 were outpatient and 60 were admitted (median stay in admission group = 1 day; range 1-3). Patient baseline characteristics, American Society of Anesthesiologists' class, and pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage were similar between the outpatient and admitted cohorts. Most patients underwent hysterectomy at the time of the sacropexy (65.4% outpatient vs 73.3% admitted, p = .08). Concomitant apical prolapse repair was more common in the outpatient group (98.1% vs 85%, p = .02). The proportion of outpatient procedures increased from 17% in 2013 to a peak of 70% in 2016. Operating room time was shorter for the outpatient cohort (103.9 minutes vs 115.5 minutes, p = .04), but other perioperative outcomes were similar. There were no intraoperative complications. The numbers of postoperative complications, readmission, and reoperations were low and similar between outpatient and admitted cohorts. No factor was predictive of admission on regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic apical prolapse repair with concomitant vaginal repairs can be performed safely as an outpatient procedure. A unique team approach may foster a shorter, more efficient procedure without compromising short-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic abdominal cerclage: a highly effective option for refractory cervical insufficiency.

Laparoscopic abdominal cerclage is emerging as the preferred treatment option for patients with refractory cervical insufficiency. Laparoscopic abdominal cerclage reduces second-trimester loss and preterm birth with success rates similar to open abdominal cerclage. Increasing evidence also suggests improved neonatal survival rates with abdominal cerclage compared with repeat vaginal cerclage in patients who delivered prematurely despite a vaginal cerclage. The option to perform a highly effective treatment using minimally invasive techniques suggests laparoscopic abdominal cerclage will become the standard of care for refractory cervical insufficiency. This review examines the literature with regard to the indications and outcomes of abdominal cerclage, highlighting the laparoscopic technique.

Factors Associated with Negative Patient Experiences with Essure Sterilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify factors associated with negative patient experiences with Essure. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study and follow-up survey. SETTING: The study was conducted in an academic setting. PATIENTS: Patients included women who had an Essure placed between 2002 and 2017. METHODS: The hospitals' database was queried to identify subjects and charts were reviewed to confirm medical information. Subjects were invited by mail, e-mail, or phone call to participate a survey regarding symptoms and satisfaction with Essure. A comparison was made between women who reported a negative experience with Essure versus those who did not. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify subject or procedural characteristics associated with any negative experience with Essure sterilization. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-four women underwent Essure sterilization between 2002 and 2017, 42.3% of whom responded to the follow-up survey. Satisfaction with Essure was reported by 61.9% of respondents. Thirty-three percent of the respondents have undergone removal or desire removal of the device. The most frequent symptoms attributed to Essure were pelvic pain, dyspareunia, and vaginal bleeding. Forty-eight percent of the respondents were identified as having any negative experience with Essure. Factors associated with negative experiences with Essure included young age at placement (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.94; P < .001), high gravidity (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.71; P = .002), and absent history of abdominal surgery (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.12-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Young age at placement, high gravidity, and absent history of abdominal surgery are factors associated with negative patient experiences following Essure sterilization. A negative experience with Essure is common, although dissatisfaction with the device is not always attributable to symptoms. This information could be considered when counseling women who plan removal of Essure. IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT: Our study provides new follow-up data with respect to hysteroscopic sterilization. This research is the first to examine any cause for negative patient experiences with Essure. Understanding factors associated with negative patient experiences could improve patient counseling regarding the extent to which symptoms could be attributed to Essure as well as counseling women who want to undergo removal of the device. These factors could in turn prove to be predictors for successful resolution of symptoms after removal of Essure. Results of this study could also be used for developing future hysteroscopic sterilization techniques.