Guideline No. 449: Diagnosis and Impact of Endometriosis - A Canadian Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a contemporary approach to the understanding of the impact and methods for the diagnosis of endometriosis in Canada. TARGET POPULATION: Individuals, families, communities, health care providers, and health care administrators who are affected by, care for patients with, or manage delivery of services for endometriosis. OPTIONS: The diagnosis of endometriosis is facilitated by a detailed history, examination, and imaging tests with providers who are experienced in endometriosis care. Surgical evaluation with pathology confirms a diagnosis of endometriosis; however, it is not required for those whose diagnosis was confirmed with imaging. OUTCOMES: There is a need to address earlier recognition of endometriosis to facilitate timely access to care and support. Education directed at the public, affected individuals and families, health care providers, and health care administrators are essential to reduce delays in diagnosis and treatment. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Increased awareness and education about the impact and approach to diagnosis may support timely access to care for patients and families affected by endometriosis. Earlier and appropriate care may support a reduced health care system burden; however, improved clinical evaluation may require initial investments. EVIDENCE: Each section was reviewed with a unique search strategy representative of the evidence available in the literature related to the area of focus. The literature searches for each section of this guideline are listed in Appendix A and include information from published systematic reviews described in the text. VALIDATION METHODS: The recommendations were developed following two rounds of review by a national expert panel through an iterative 2-year consensus process. Further details on the process are shared in Appendix B. The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See Appendix C (Table C1 for definitions and Table C2 for interpretations of strong and conditional recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: This guideline is intended to support health care providers and policymakers involved in the care of those impacted by endometriosis and the systems required to support them. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Endometriosis impact and diagnosis updated guidelines for Canadian health care providers and policymakers. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Predictive Factors for Morcellation during Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to identify predictors of morcellation during a total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2) taking place in a university hospital center in Quebec, Canada. Participants were women undergoing a TLH for a benign gynaecologic pathology from January 1, 2017, to January 31, 2019. All women underwent a TLH. If the uterus was too voluminous to be removed vaginally, surgeons favoured in-bag morcellation by laparoscopy. Uterine weight and characteristics were assessed before surgery by ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging to predict morcellation. RESULTS: A total of 252 women underwent a TLH and the mean age was 46 ± 7 (30-71) years old. The main indications for surgery were abnormal uterine bleeding (77%), chronic pelvic pain (36%) and bulk symptoms (25%). Mean uterine weight was 325 (17-1572) ± 272 grams, with 11/252 (4%) uterus being >1000 grams and 71% of women had at least 1 leiomyoma. Among women with a uterine weight <250 grams, 120 (95%) did not require morcellation. On the opposite, among women with a uterine weight >500 grams, 49 (100%) required morcellation. In addition to the estimated uterine weight (≥250 vs. <250 grams; OR 3.7 [CI 1.8 to 7.7, P < 0.01]), having ≥ 1 leiomyoma (OR 4.1, CI 1.0 to 16.0, P = 0.01) and leiomyoma of ≥5 cm (OR 8.6, CI 4.1 to 17.9, P < 0.01) were other significant predictors morcellation in multivariate logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine weight estimated by preoperative imaging as well as the size and number of leiomyomas are useful predictors of the need for morcellation.

Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before benign laparoscopic or vaginal gynecologic surgeries. DATA SOURCES: Database searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Sciences and citations and reference lists published up to December 2021. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials in any language comparing MBP with no preparation were included. Two reviewers independently screened 925 records and extracted data from 12 selected articles and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials tool. A random-effects model was used for the analysis. Surgeon findings (surgical field view, quality of bowel handling and bowel preparation), operative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, length of stay, surgical site infection), and patient's preoperative symptoms and satisfaction were collected. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Thirteen studies (1715 patients) assessing oral and rectal preparations before laparoscopic and vaginal gynecologic surgeries were included. No significant differences were observed with or without MBP on surgical field view (primary outcome, risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.05, p = .66, I2 = 0%), bowel handling (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95-1.08, p = .78, I2 = 67%), or bowel preparation. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in perioperative findings. MBP was associated with increased pain (mean difference [MD] 11.62[2.80-20.44], I2 = 76, p = .01), weakness (MD 10.73[0.60-20.87], I2 = 94, p = .04), hunger (MD 17.52 [8.04-27.00], I2 = 83, p = .0003), insomnia (MD 10.13[0.57-19.68], I2 = 82, p = .04), and lower satisfaction (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87, I2 = 76%, p = .002) compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: MBP has not been associated with improved surgical field view, bowel handling, or operative outcome. However, in view of the adverse effects induced, its routine use before benign gynecologic surgeries should be abandoned.

Evaluation of a Standardized Questionnaire for Initial Assessment of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Premenopausal Women.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a standardized questionnaire for premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) on clinical information collection and duration of consultation. METHODS: We conducted a before and after study involving 100 premenopausal women undergoing consultation for AUB. During stage 1, 50 consultations were recorded on a consultation sheet with no specific template. During stage 2, 50 women completed a 26-item auto-administered standardized questionnaire before the consultation, which was then reviewed with the consultant and added to the medical record. The duration of consultation was assessed in subgroups of 27 women in each stage. Two independent evaluators assessed the quality and completeness of data collected in the medical records using a score sheet developed by experts. Outcomes from both stages were compared using the t test. RESULTS: The descriptive characteristics were similar in both groups. The mean global scores of the quality and completeness of data collected improved significantly between stages 1 and 2, from 67% ± 12% to 95% ± 5% (P < 0.0001), as did medical background scores (54% ± 29% vs. 85% ± 13%; P < 0.0001) and AUB-related symptoms scores (69% ± 13% vs. 97% ± 5%; P < 0.0001). A mean reduction in duration of consultation of nearly 4 minutes was observed (24.6 ± 4.3 min vs. 20.7 ± 4.8 min; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The AUB-specific standardized questionnaire improves quality and completeness of data collected in medical records and reduces duration of consultation.

Effect of Postoperative Hormonal Suppression on Fertility in Patients With Endometriosis After Conservative Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of hormonal suppression on fertility when administered to infertile patients or patient wishing to conceive after surgery for endometriosis. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed by two independent reviewers from the databases' inception until December 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials comparing any suppressive hormonal therapy to an inactive control (placebo or absence of treatment) after conservative surgery for endometriosis. Studies that did not report fertility outcomes after surgery were excluded. TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias as well as the strength of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines were followed. Relative risks (RRs) were pooled by quantitative random effect meta-analysis. From 3,138 citations, 19 trials (2,028 patients) were included. Overall, no difference was observed between the treatment and the control group for pregnancy (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00-1.32) and live births (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.84-1.32). When pooling all hormonal therapies, the duration of administration of postoperative therapy was identified as a substantial source of heterogeneity between studies (I2 difference=74%) with increased chances of pregnancy compared with control when administered for at least 3 months (RR 1.22; 95% CI 1.04-1.43). Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (14 trials, 1,721 patients) were associated with increased chances of pregnancy compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03-1.41; I2=25%). Data were limited for other hormonal treatments with no significant difference between groups. Subgroup analyses taking into account the use of fertility treatments (insemination or in vitro fertilization), stages of the disease and risk of bias of included trials did not modify the results. CONCLUSION: Postoperative hormonal suppression should be considered on a case-by-case basis to enhance fertility while balancing this benefit with the risks of delaying conception. If chosen, GnRH agonists would be the treatment of choice, and a duration of at least 3 months should be favored. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021224424.

A Pre-Phase III Efficacy Trial of the Spermicide/Contraceptive Effect of the Invisible Condom, a Non-Hormonal Vaginal Gel, in Women from Canada.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the spermicidal efficacy of non-hormonal vaginal gel in vitro and in a post-coital test, and to evaluate its contraceptive efficacy in Canadian women of childbearing age. METHODS: We conducted single-centre trial to assess spermicidal and contraceptive efficacy of vaginal gel. Participants were healthy, sexually active women aged 18-49 years and their regular male sexual partners (30 couples). Measured outcomes included effect of vaginal gel on sperm motility in vitro, its effect on sperm in a post-coital test, and its effect on pregnancy prevention over 3 months. RESULTS: For in vitro spermicidal effect, 98% and 67% of sperm were immotile in the presence of the gel with sodium lauryl sulfate (gel-SLS) and gel alone, respectively. For the post-coital test, 99% and 93% of sperm were immotile in the presence of gel-SLS and gel alone, respectively. In the second part of trial, a total of 410 instances of vaginal intercourse in 95 menstrual cycles were protected (during 3-month period of gel-SLS use before each sexual intercourse with probability of 24 conceptions prevented according to Wilcox's table). Four women became pregnant during the study period; 2 during unprotected vaginal intercourse around the time of ovulation, and 2 attributed to user failure. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, the vaginal gel demonstrated important spermicidal and contraceptive effect. A larger phase III contraceptive efficacy trial is warranted. The vaginal gel may represent a non-hormonal spermicide/contraceptive option for women.

Morcellation During Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomies: Implications of the Use of a Contained Bag System.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to report the feasibility and clinical implications of in-bag morcellation for total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). METHODS: Women who required uterine morcellation during TLH from January 2017 to December 2018 (at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec - CHUL, Québec, QC) were included. Women with a preoperative suspicion of malignancy were excluded (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). RESULTS: During the 2-year study period, uterine morcellation was required in 42% (106 of 252) of women undergoing TLH. Mean uterine weight of morcellated uterus was 541 ± 291 g, with 11 of 106 uteri weighing >1000 g. In-bag morcellation was attempted in 84 of 106 (79%) and successfully performed in 79 of 84 (94%) women. Failures resulted from inability to insert the specimen into the bag or apparent perforation. Uncontained morcellation was chosen for 22 of 106 (21%) women, most of whom underwent vaginal morcellation of the uterus. Total operative time was 40 minutes longer for the in-bag morcellation group (170 ± 48 vs. 130 ± 43 min; P < 0.001), although this difference can be partly explained by the higher mean uterine size compared with the uncontained morcellation group (580 ± 309 vs. 391 ± 122 g; P = 0.01). In a subgroup analysis of 16 women, the mean times of installation and extraction of the bag were estimated to be 17 ± 9 and 4 ± 3 minutes, respectively. Complications were infrequent (2 of 106) and occurred in the in-bag morcellation group. CONCLUSION: In-bag morcellation is feasible in a high proportion of women undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy and is associated with an increase in operative time. Larger studies will be required in order to better assess the risk of complications with in-bag morcellation and the potential benefits of this technique, namely, reducing the spread of tissue.

Contained Morcellation of Very Large Uterus.

A 38-year-old woman was referred to our centre for symptomatic leiomyoma. The patient had a large uterus, heavy menstrual bleeding, and compressive symptoms refractory to medical treatments. The patient was then scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy with contained morcellation. After circular colpotomy completion, a strong, folded, 4-L bag with an additional sleeve for the optics was inserted into the abdominal cavity through the vagina. The colored tabs on the edge of the bag mouth served as landmarks during bag deployment. After ensuring optimal positioning, the entire bag was fully deployed, and the specimen was placed inside. Thereafter, the coloured tabs were joined together, and a monofilament drawstring was cinched to close the bag and pulled out through the suprapubic trocar. Next, the small extra sleeve was brought up through the umbilical incision. The bag was then insufflated, and the power morcellator was inserted through the suprapubic incision. After completing the morcellation, the pneumo bag was evacuated, and knots were made in both openings of the bag to avoid spillage. The closed bag was finally removed through the vagina, with final laparoscopic closure of the vaginal vault.

Endometrial ablation or resection versus levonorgestrel intra-uterine system for the treatment of women with heavy menstrual bleeding and a normal uterine cavity: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endometrial ablation/resection and the levonorgestrel intra-uterine system (LNG-IUS) are well-established treatment options for heavy menstrual bleeding to avoid more invasive alternatives, such as hysterectomy. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of endometrial ablation or resection with the LNG-IUS in the treatment of premenopausal women with heavy menstrual bleeding and to investigate sources of heterogeneity between studies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Biosis and Google Scholar as well as citations and reference lists published up to August 2019. Two authors independently screened 3701 citations for eligibility. We included randomized controlled trials published in any language, comparing endometrial ablation or resection to the LNG-IUS in the treatment of premenopausal women with heavy menstrual bleeding and a normal uterine cavity. OUTCOMES: Thirteen studies (N = 884) were eligible. Two independent authors extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. Random effect models were used to compare the modalities and evaluate sources of heterogeneity. No significant differences were observed between endometrial ablation/resection and the LNG-IUS in terms of subsequent hysterectomy (primary outcome, risk ratio (RR) = 1.13, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.11, P = 0.71, I2 = 14%, 12 studies, 726 women), satisfaction, quality of life, amenorrhea and treatment failure. However, side effects were less common in women treated with endometrial ablation/resection compared to the LNG-IUS (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.71, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%, 10 studies, 580 women). Three complications were reported in the endometrial ablation/resection group and none in the LNG-IUS group (P = 0.25). Mean age of the studied populations was identified as a significant source of heterogeneity between studies in subgroup analysis (P = 0.01). In fact, endometrial ablation/resection was associated with a higher risk of subsequent hysterectomy compared to the LNG-IUS in younger populations (mean age ≤ 42 years old, RR = 5.26, 95% CI 1.21 to 22.91, P = 0.03, I2 = 0%, 3 studies, 189 women). On the contrary, subsequent hysterectomy seemed to be less likely with endometrial ablation/resection compared to the LNG-IUS in older populations (mean age > 42 years old), although the reduction did not reach statistical significance (RR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.24, P = 0.14, I2 = 0%, 5 studies, 297 women). Finally, sensitivity analysis taking into account the risk of bias of included studies and type of surgical devices (first and second generation) did not modify the results. Most of the included studies reported outcomes at up to 3 years, and the relative performance of endometrial ablation/resection and LNG-IUS remains unknown in the longer term. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Endometrial ablation/resection and the LNG-IUS are two excellent treatment options for heavy menstrual bleeding, although women treated with the LNG-IUS are at higher risk of experiencing side effects compared to endometrial ablation/resection. Otherwise, younger women seem to present a lower risk of eventually requiring hysterectomy when treated with the LNG-IUS compared to endometrial ablation/resection.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Intraoperative Tools for Detecting Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative laparoscopic imaging tools in reference to that of histopathology for detecting endometriotic lesions and to compare them with conventional white-light inspection by performing a systematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases in addition to citations and reference lists until the end of February 2019. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two authors screened 1038 citations for eligibility. We included randomized controlled trials or prospective cohort studies published in English, assessing the accuracy of intraoperative imaging tools for diagnosing endometriosis during laparoscopy. We considered studies using histopathologic evaluation as a standard criterion. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Seven studies were eligible, including 472 women and 1717 histopathologic specimens, and they involved study of the use of narrow-band imaging (2 studies), 5-aminolevulinic acid-induced fluorescence (2 studies), autofluorescence imaging (1 study), indocyanine green (1 study), and a 3-dimensional robotic laparoscopy (1 study). Two authors extracted data and assessed the validity of the included studies. Bivariate random-effects models and McNemar's test were used to compare the tests and evaluate sources of heterogeneity. Four studies were attributed a high risk of bias, and biopsies of normal-looking peritoneum were not performed to verify the results in 3 studies; both factors were identified as significant sources of heterogeneity, leading to the overestimation of the sensitivity and underestimation of the specificity of imaging tools. In all studies, additional endometriotic lesions were diagnosed with the enhanced imaging tool compared with white-light inspection alone. In the 4 studies that appropriately performed control biopsies (171 women, 448 specimens), enhanced imaging techniques were associated with a higher sensitivity and specificity compared with white-light inspection (0.84 and 0.89 compared with 0.75 and 0.76, respectively, p ≤.001). Adverse events were uncommon (n = 5) and reported only with the use of exogeneous photosensitizers. There were no reports of long-term changes in patient-reported outcomes arising from better detection of endometriosis lesions. CONCLUSION: Studies report that enhanced imaging allows for the detection of additional endometriotic lesions missed by conventional white-light laparoscopy. The benefits of finding these additional lesions using enhanced imaging compared with white-light inspection alone on long-term postoperative outcomes have not been determined, and these tools should be considered only in a research context at this time.

Pyomyoma After Uterine Artery Embolization: Laparotomy Avoided by In-Bag Morcellation.

We report a case of a pyomyoma in which in-bag morcellation allowed for a total laparoscopic hysterectomy instead of laparotomy, which has been recognized as the standard of care to avoid the spread of infection from morcellation. A 45-year-old multiparous woman presented with sepsis, pelvic pain, and leukocytosis at 1 month after undergoing uterine artery embolization for symptomatic uterine leiomyoma. Pelvic computed tomography scan revealed a 9-cm suspected pyomyoma. A total hysterectomy was performed using a laparoscopic approach with in-bag morcellation. The intervention was successful, and the postoperative course was uneventful. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 1 and was well at 2 months after surgery.

Virtual Laparoscopy Simulation: a Promising Pedagogic Tool in Gynecology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Virtual simulators have played a vital role in preparing surgeons for laparoscopic and robotic procedures in gynecologic surgery. The efficacy of the simulator was evaluated to improve basic (trainee) laparoscopic skills and assess training levels. METHODS: This prospective, comparative study was conducted in volunteer residents in the obstetrics and gynecology training program of Université Laval. Study participants performed 9 laparoscopic simulator tasks on 2 different occasions. Skills improvement between sessions and differences between junior and senior residents were examined. RESULTS: Thirteen junior and 11 senior residents participated in the study. Junior trainees significantly improved their speed of execution, accuracy, and maintenance of horizontal view. Senior trainees mainly accelerated their rapidity in completing different tasks. They performed better than junior trainees, with economy of movements, and tended toward greater precision, speed of execution, and safe retraction in various tasks. CONCLUSION: Virtual simulators are useful pedagogic tools that could benefit both junior and senior residents. Integration into the residency curricula should be considered.

No. 345-Primary Dysmenorrhea Consensus Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: This guideline reviews the investigation and treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. INTENDED USERS: Health care providers. TARGET POPULATION: Women and adolescents experiencing menstrual pain for which no underlying cause has been identified. EVIDENCE: Published clinical trials, population studies, and review articles cited in PubMed or the Cochrane database from January 2005 to March 2016. VALIDATION METHODS: Seven clinical questions were generated by the authors and reviewed by the SOGC Clinical Practice-Gynaecology Committee. The available literature was searched. Guideline No. 169 was reviewed and rewritten in order to incorporate current evidence. Recommendations addressing the identified clinical questions were formulated and evaluated using the ranking of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Primary dysmenorrhea is common and frequently undertreated. Effective therapy is widely available at minimal cost. Treatment has the potential to improve quality of life and to decrease time lost from school or work. GUIDELINE UPDATE: This guideline is a revision and update of No. 169, December 2005. SPONSORS: SOGC. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Augmented Angiogenic Factors Expression via FP Signaling Pathways in Peritoneal Endometriosis.

CONTEXT: Angiogenesis is required for ectopic endometrial tissue growth. Our previous studies showed that prostaglandin F2α (PGF2α) biosynthetic enzymes and receptor were markedly elevated in endometriotic lesions and that PGF2α is a potent angiogenic factor in endothelial cells. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether or not the F-prostanoid receptor modulates angiogenesis in ectopic stromal cells. DESIGN: Release of angiogenic factors by ectopic endometrial stromal cell primary cultures stimulated with PGF2αand exposed to agents that target PGF2α signaling was assessed. SETTING: The study was conducted in an immunology laboratory at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (Québec City) medical research center. PATIENTS: Women found to have peritoneal endometriosis during laparoscopy were included in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Prostaglandin E2, PGF2α, vascular endothelial cell growth factor, and CXC chemokine ligand 8 mRNA and protein; FP prostanoid receptor expression. RESULTS: PGF2α markedly up-regulated prostaglandin E2, CXC chemokine ligand 8 and vascular endothelial cell growth factor secretion in endometriotic cells. This effect was suppressed in the presence of a specific F-prostanoid antagonist (AL8810) and its signaling pathway was dependent on F-prostanoid receptor variant. PGF2α can exert its proliferative and angiogenic activities either directly by stimulating endothelial cell proliferation, migration and angiogenesis through F-prostanoid receptor, or indirectly, by stimulating endometriotic stromal cells to produce potent angiogenic factors through either receptor variant. CONCLUSION: These results show for the first time that PGF2α exerts an angiogenic effect on ectopic stromal cells, inducing the secretion of major angiogenic factors via different F-prostanoid signaling pathways. This study suggests a new interpretation of the mechanism underlying endometriosis development involving PGF2α in endometriosis-associated angio-inflammatory changes.

Promotion of angiogenesis and proliferation cytokines patterns in peritoneal fluid from women with endometriosis.

Studies have long sought specific cytokines that could characterize endometriosis. Either due to variations between study designs regarding the assessment criteria for the cytokine or to low power resulting from small sample size, no factor proved to be sufficiently specific to endometriosis. In other clinical fields, a combination of several markers proved to be more powerful than a single-molecule approach. As well, in the context of endometriosis, simultaneous assessment of several cytokines present in the peritoneal fluid might help in unveiling patho-physiological processes, thus contributing to a better understanding of the condition. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate peritoneal fluid cytokines-derived of endometriotic women. For this retrospective case-control study, peritoneal fluid samples were obtained at laparoscopy and assessed by multiplex. Our data showed distinct patterns of peritoneal fluid cytokine concentrations in endometriotic women most notably a marked increase in EGF, FGF-2, IL-1α, MIP-1ß, TGFα, PDGF-AA, PDGF-BB, MCP-3, sCD40L, Gro Pan, IL-17α, MDC and Rantes. The overall effect of fertility status revealed a significant difference for only one cytokine, namely MDC. Furthermore, FLT-3L and IP-10 levels were decreased in endometriosis patients, the former in both menstrual cycle phases and the latter in the secretory phase. A significant inverse Pearson correlation (p<0.05) was noted between pro-angiogenic cytokines EGF and FGF and the anti-angiogenic cytokine IP-10 in endometriosis patients at stages III-IV and in the secretory phase. These changes may exacerbate the local peritoneal angiogenic and proliferative reaction observed in women with endometriosis, and contributes to its pathophysiology.

Low vs Standard Pressures in Gynecologic Laparoscopy: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The optimal intraperitoneal pressure during laparoscopy is not known. Recent literature found benefits of using lower pressures, but the safety of doing abdominal surgery with low peritoneal pressures needs to be assessed. This systematic review compares low with standard pneumoperitoneum during gynecologic laparoscopy. DATABASE: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing intraperitoneal pressures during gynecologic laparoscopy. Two authors reviewed references and extracted data from included trials. Risk ratios, mean differences, and standard mean differences were calculated and pooled using RevMan5. Of 2251 studies identified, three were included in the systematic review, for a total of 238 patients. We found a statistically significant but modest diminution in postoperative pain of 0.38 standardized unit based on an original 10-point scale (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.67 to -0.08) during the immediate postoperative period when using low intraperitoneal pressure of 8 mm Hg compared with ≥ 12 mm Hg and of 0.50 (95% CI, -0.80 to -0.21) 24 hours after the surgery. Lower pressures were associated with worse visualization of the surgical field (risk ratio, 10.31; 95% CI, 1.29-82.38). We found no difference between groups over blood loss, duration of surgery, hospital length of stay, or the need for increased pressure. CONCLUSION: Low intraperitoneal pressures during gynecologic laparoscopy cannot be recommended on the behalf of this review because improvement in pain scores is minimal and visualization of the surgical field is affected. The safety of this intervention as well as cost-effectiveness considerations need to be further studied.

Complications of low compared to standard pneumoperitoneum pressures in laparoscopic surgery for benign gynecologic pathology: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: No definite consensus has been established about the optimal pressure for artificial pneumoperitoneum when performing laparoscopic surgery. It has been postulated that lowering intra-peritoneal pressure levels while performing general laparoscopic surgery would lower surgical complications including post-operative pain, but data remain scarce about significant operative complications. Furthermore, such data is not available for gynecologic laparoscopy. The objective of this systematic review is to compare the frequency and nature of significant operative complications of lower and standard pneumoperiteoneal pressure levels in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery for benign indications. METHODS/DESIGN: We will search PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, randomised control trials registries, and reference lists of included articles. Randomised controlled trials comparing different intra-peritoneal pressure levels in women undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery for a non-malignant indication will be eligible. Two reviewers will independently select and review references, extract data, and assess quality from included studies. We will use RevMan5 to calculate risk ratios and their 95 % confidence intervals to compare the frequency of complications according to intra-peritoneal pressure levels. We will perform sensitivity analyses to explore heterogeneity potentially due to various operative characteristics or characteristics of patients. DISCUSSION: Our results will help identify the optimal intra-peritoneal pressure level in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery and determine if lowering intra-peritoneal pressure levels while trying to achieve lower levels of post-operative pain is an acceptable change of practice according to the frequency and nature of significant complications. PROSPERO: CRD42015020231.

Endometrial ablation in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is the direct cause of a significant health care burden for women, their families, and society as a whole. Up to 30% of women will seek medical assistance for the problem during their reproductive years. OBJECTIVE: To provide current evidence-based guidelines on the techniques and technologies used in endometrial ablation (EA), a minimally invasive technique for the management of AUB of benign origin. METHODS: Members of the guideline committee were selected on the basis of individual expertise to represent a range of practical and academic experience in terms of both location in Canada and type of practice, as well as subspecialty expertise and general background in gynaecology. The committee reviewed all available evidence in the English medical literature, including published guidelines, and evaluated surgical and patient outcomes for the various EA techniques. Recommendations were established by consensus. EVIDENCE: Published literature was retrieved through searches of MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library in 2013 and 2014 using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (endometrial ablation, hysteroscopy, menorrhagia, heavy menstrual bleeding, AUB, hysterectomy). RESULTS were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English from January 2000 to November 2014. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to December 2014. Grey (unpublished) literature was identifies through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES: The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). RESULTS: This document reviews the evidence regarding the available techniques and technologies for EA, preoperative and postoperative care, operative set-up, anaesthesia, and practical considerations for practice. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Implementation of the guideline recommendations will improve the provision of EA as an effective treatment of AUB. Following these recommendations would allow the surgical procedure to be performed safely and maximize success for patients. CONCLUSIONS: EA is a safe and effective minimally invasive option for the treatment of AUB of benign etiology. Summary Statements 1. Endometrial ablation is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical procedure that has become a well-established alternative to medical treatment or hysterectomy to treat abnormal uterine bleeding in select cases. (I) 2. Endometrial preparation can be used to facilitate resectoscopic endometrial ablation (EA) and can be considered for some non-resectoscopic techniques. For resectoscopic EA, preoperative endometrial thinning results in higher short-term amenorrhea rates, decreased irrigant fluid absorption, and shorter operative time than no treatment. (I) 3. Non-resectoscopic techniques are technically easier to perform than resectoscopic techniques, have shorter operative times, and allow the use of local rather than general anaesthesia. However, both techniques have comparable patient satisfaction and reduction of heavy menstrual bleeding. (I) 4. Both resectoscopic and non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation (EA) have low complication rates. Uterine perforation, fluid overload, hematometra, and cervical lacerations are more common with resectoscopic EA; perioperative nausea/vomiting, uterine cramping, and pain are more common with non-resectoscopic EA. (I) 5. All non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation devices available in Canada have demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing menstrual flow and result in high patient satisfaction. The choice of which device to use depends primarily on surgical judgement and the availability of resources. (I) 6. The use of local anaesthetic and blocks, oral analgesia, and conscious sedation allows for the provision of non-resectoscopic EA in lower resource-intense environments including regulated non-hospital settings. (II-2) 7. Low-risk patients with satisfactory pain tolerance are good candidates to undergo endometrial ablation in settings outside the operating room or in free-standing surgical centres. (II-2) 8. Both resectoscopic and non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation are relatively safe procedures with low complication rates. The complications perforation with potential injury to contiguous structures, hemorrhage, and infection. (II-2) 9. Combined hysteroscopic sterilization and endometrial ablation can be safe and efficacious while favouring a minimally invasive approach. (II-2) Recommendations 1. Preoperative assessment should be comprehensive to rule out any contraindication to endometrial ablation. (II-2A) 2. Patients should be counselled about the need for permanent contraception following endometrial ablation. (II-2B) 3. Recommended evaluations for abnormal uterine bleeding, including but not limited to endometrial sampling and an assessment of the uterine cavity, are necessary components of the preoperative assessment. (II-2B) 4. Clinicians should be vigilant for complications unique to resectoscopic endometrial ablation such as those related to fluid distention media and electrosurgical injuries. (III-A) 5. For resectoscopic endometrial ablation, a strict protocol should be followed for fluid monitoring and management to minimize the risk of complications of distension medium overload. (III-A) 6. If uterine perforation is suspected to have occurred during cervical dilatation or with the resectoscope (without electrosurgery), the procedure should be abandoned and the patient should be closely monitored for signs of intraperitoneal hemorrhage or visceral injury. If the perforation occurs with electrosurgery or if the mechanism of perforation is uncertain, abdominal exploration is warranted to obtain hemostasis and rule out visceral injury. (III-B) 7. With resectoscopic endometrial ablation, if uterine perforation has been ruled out acute hemorrhage may be managed by using intrauterine Foley balloon tamponade, injecting intracervical vasopressors, or administering rectal misoprostol. (III-B) 8. If repeat endometrial ablation (EA) is considered following non-resectoscopic or resectoscopic EA, it should be performed by a hysteroscopic surgeon with direct visualization of the cavity. Patients should be counselled about the increased risk of complications with repeat EA. (II-2A) 9. If significant intracavitary pathology is present, resectoscopic endometrial ablation combined with hysteroscopic myomectomy or polypectomy should be considered in a non-fertility sparing setting. (II-3A).

Contexte : Les saignements utérins anormaux (SUA) sont directement à l'origine d'un fardeau de santé considérable que doivent porter les femmes, leur famille et la société en général. Jusqu'à 30 % des femmes chercheront à obtenir l'aide d'un médecin pour contrer ce problème au cours de leurs années de fertilité. Objectif : Fournir des lignes directrices factuelles à jour quant aux techniques et aux technologies utilisées aux fins de l'ablation de l'endomètre (AE), soit une intervention à effraction minimale permettant la prise en charge des SUA d'origine bénigne. Méthodes : Les membres du comité sur la directive clinique ont été sélectionnés en fonction de leurs spécialisations respectives en vue de représenter une gamme d'expériences pratiques et universitaires : le milieu de pratique au Canada, le type de pratique, la sous-spécialité et les antécédents généraux en gynécologie ont donc été pris en considération. Le comité a analysé les données pertinentes issues de la littérature médicale anglophone (y compris les lignes directrices publiées), en plus d'évaluer les issues chirurgicales et les issues qu'ont connues les patientes à la suite de l'utilisation de diverses techniques d'AE. Les recommandations ont été formulées par consensus. Données : La littérature publiée a été récupérée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans MEDLINE et The Cochrane Library en 2013 et en 2014 au moyen d'un vocabulaire contrôlé et de mots clés appropriés (p. ex. « endometrial ablation ¼, « hysteroscopy ¼, « menorrhagia ¼, « heavy menstrual bleeding ¼, « AUB ¼, « hysterectomy ¼). Les résultats ont été restreints aux analyses systématiques, aux études observationnelles et aux essais comparatifs randomisés / essais cliniques comparatifs publiés en anglais entre janvier 2000 et novembre 2014. Les recherches ont été mises à jour de façon régulière et intégrées à la directive clinique jusqu'en décembre 2014. La littérature grise (non publiée) a été identifiée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans les sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, dans des registres d'essais cliniques et auprès de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. Valeurs : La qualité des résultats a été évaluée au moyen des critères décrits dans le rapport du Groupe d'étude canadien sur les soins de santé préventifs (Tableau). Résultats : Le présent document passe en revue les données quant aux techniques et aux technologies disponibles en ce qui concerne l'AE, les soins préopératoires et postopératoires, le milieu d'intervention, l'anesthésie et les facteurs pratiques à prendre en considération. Avantages, désavantages et coûts : La mise en œuvre des recommandations de la présente directive clinique entraînera une amélioration de l'offre de l'AE à titre de traitement efficace contre les SUA. Le respect de ces recommandations permettrait l'exécution de l'intervention chirurgicale en cause de façon sûre et en maximiserait la réussite pour les patientes. Conclusions : L'AE est une option à effraction minimale sûre et efficace pour la prise en charge des SUA d'étiologie bénigne. Déclarations sommaires 1. L'ablation de l'endomètre est une intervention chirurgicale à effraction minimale sûre et efficace qui en est venue à constituer, dans certains cas, une solution de rechange bien établie au traitement médical ou à l'hystérectomie pour la prise en charge des saignements utérins anormaux. (I) 2. Une préparation de l'endomètre peut être mise en œuvre pour en faciliter l'ablation résectoscopique et peut également être envisagée dans le cas de certaines techniques non résectoscopiques. Lorsque l'on a recours à l'ablation résectoscopique de l'endomètre, l'amincissement préopératoire de ce dernier donne lieu à une hausse des taux d'aménorrhée à court terme, à une atténuation de l'absorption du liquide de distension et à une réduction de la durée opératoire, par comparaison avec l'absence de traitement. (I) 3. Les techniques non résectoscopiques sont techniquement plus faciles à utiliser que les techniques résectoscopiques, nécessitent des temps opératoires plus courts et permettent l'utilisation d'une anesthésie locale (plutôt que d'avoir recours à une anesthésie générale). Toutefois, ces deux techniques comptent des taux comparables de satisfaction des patientes et d'atténuation des saignements menstruels abondants. (I) 4. Les techniques résectoscopiques et non résectoscopiques d'ablation de l'endomètre comptent toutes de faibles taux de complication. La perforation utérine, la surcharge liquidienne, l'hématomètre et les lacérations cervicales sont plus courantes dans le cas de l'AE résectoscopique; les crampes utérines, la douleur et les nausées / vomissements périopératoires sont plus courants dans le cas de l'AE non résectoscopique. (I) 5. L'efficacité de tous les dispositifs d'ablation non résectoscopique de l'endomètre disponibles au Canada a été démontrée en ce qui concerne l'atténuation du flux menstruel; de plus, ils mènent tous à des taux élevés de satisfaction des patientes. Le choix du dispositif à utiliser dépend principalement de l'opinion du chirurgien et de la disponibilité des ressources. (I) 6. L'utilisation d'anesthésiques et de blocs locaux, d'une analgésie orale et d'une sédation consciente permet la tenue d'une ablation non résectoscopique de l'endomètre au sein de milieux nécessitant des ressources moindres, y compris dans des milieux non hospitaliers réglementés. (II-2) 7. Les patientes n'étant exposées qu'à de faibles risques et présentant une tolérance satisfaisante à la douleur sont de bonnes candidates pour ce qui est de la tenue d'une ablation endométriale dans un milieu autre qu'en salle d'opération ou dans un centre chirurgical autonome. (II-2) 8. Les techniques d'ablation de l'endomètre tant résectoscopiques que non résectoscopiques sont relativement sûres et ne comptent que de faibles taux de complication. Parmi les complications les plus graves, on trouve la perforation (s'accompagnant de lésions potentielles aux structures adjacentes), l'hémorragie et l'infection. (II-2) 9. La tenue concomitante d'une stérilisation hystéroscopique et d'une ablation endométriale peut être sûre et efficace tout en favorisant une approche à effraction minimale. (II-2) Recommandations 1. L'évaluation préopératoire devrait être exhaustive, de façon à pouvoir écarter toute contre-indication à l'ablation de l'endomètre. (II-2A) 2. Les patientes devraient être avisées de la nécessité d'une contraception permanente à la suite de l'ablation de l'endomètre. (II-2B) 3. Les évaluations recommandées en présence de saignements utérins anormaux (dont, entre autres, le prélèvement endométrial et l'évaluation de la cavité utérine) sont des composantes nécessaires de l'évaluation préopératoire. (II-2B) 4. Les cliniciens devraient demeurer à l'affût des complications propres à l'ablation résectoscopique de l'endomètre, comme celles qui sont associées au produit de distension et aux lésions électrochirurgicales. (III-A) 5. Dans le cas de l'ablation résectoscopique de l'endomètre, un protocole strict devrait être respecté pour ce qui est de la surveillance liquidienne et de la prise en charge, et ce, afin de minimiser le risque de voir se manifester des complications associées à la surcharge de produit de distension. (III-A) 6. Lorsque l'on soupçonne qu'une perforation utérine s'est manifestée au cours de la dilatation cervicale ou dans le cadre de l'utilisation du résectoscope (sans électrochirurgie), l'intervention devrait être abandonnée et la patiente devrait faire l'objet d'une surveillance étroite de façon à ce que l'on puisse demeurer à l'affût des signes d'hémorragie intrapéritonéale ou de lésion viscérale. Lorsque la perforation se manifeste dans le cadre d'une électrochirurgie ou lorsque le mécanisme de la perforation demeure incertain, la tenue d'une exploration abdominale est justifiée pour assurer l'hémostase et écarter la présence de lésions viscérales. (III-B) 7. Dans le cas de l'AE résectoscopique, lorsque la présence d'une perforation utérine a été écartée, l'hémorragie aiguë pourrait être prise en charge au moyen d'un tamponnement intra-utérin par sonde de Foley, d'une injection intracervicale de vasopresseurs ou de l'administration de misoprostol par voie rectale. (III-B) 8. Lorsqu'une nouvelle ablation de l'endomètre est envisagée à la suite d'une intervention non résectoscopique ou résectoscopique, elle devrait être menée par un chirurgien hystéroscopique sous visualisation directe de la cavité. Les patientes devraient bénéficier de services de counseling au sujet des risques de complications qui sont associés à la tenue d'une nouvelle ablation de l'endomètre. (II-2A) 9. En présence d'une pathologie intracavitaire considérable, la tenue concomitante d'une ablation résectoscopique de l'endomètre et d'une myomectomie / polypectomie hystéroscopique devrait être envisagée. (II-3A).

Feasibility and safety of outpatient total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ambulatory total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) could lead to significant cost savings, but some fear the effects of what could be premature postsurgical discharge. We sought to estimate the feasibility and safety of TLH as an outpatient procedure for benign gynecologic conditions. METHODS: We report a prospective, consecutive case series of 128 outpatient TLHs performed for benign gynecologic conditions in a tertiary care center. RESULTS: Of the 295 women scheduled for a TLH, 151 (51%) were attempted as an outpatient procedure. A total of 128 women (85%) were actually discharged home the day of their surgery. The most common reasons for admission the same day were urinary retention (19%) and nausea (15%). Indications for hysterectomy were mainly leiomyomas (62%), menorrhagia (24%), and pelvic pain (9%). Endometriosis and adhesions were found in 23% and 25% of the cases, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss was 56 mL and mean uterus weight was 215 g, with the heaviest uterus weighing 841 g. Unplanned consultation and readmission were infrequent, occurring in 3.1% and 0.8% of cases, respectively, in the first 72 hours. At 3 months, unplanned consultation, complication, and readmission had occurred in a similar proportion of inpatient and outpatient TLHs (17.2%, 12.5%, and 4.7% versus 18.1%, 12.7%, and 5.4%, respectively). In a logistic regression model, uterus weight, presence of adhesions or endometriosis, and duration of the operation were not associated with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Same-day discharge is a feasible and safe option for carefully selected patients who undergo an uncomplicated TLH, even in the presence of leiomyomas, severe adhesions, or endometriosis.