Posterior Deep Infiltrating Endometriotic Nodules: Operative Considerations according to Lesion Size, Location, and Geometry, during One’s Learning Curve

  • Protopapas A
  • Giannoulis G
  • Chatzipapas I
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We conducted this prospective cohort study to standardize our laparoscopic technique of excision of posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) nodules, according to their size, location, and geometry, including 36 patients who were grouped, according to principal pelvic expansion of the nodule, into groups with central (group 1) and lateral (group 2) lesions, and according to nodule size, into ≤2 cm (group A) and >2 cm (group B) lesions, respectively. In cases of group 1 the following operative steps were more frequently performed compared to those of group 2: suspension of the rectosigmoid, colpectomy, and placement of bowel wall reinforcement sutures. The opposite was true regarding suspension of the adnexa, systematic ureteric dissection, and removal of the diseased pelvic peritoneum. When grouping patients according to nodule size, almost all of the examined parameters were more frequently applied to patients of group B: adnexal suspension, suspension of the rectosigmoid, systematic ureteric dissection, division of uterine vein, colpectomy, and placement of bowel wall reinforcement sutures. Nodule size was the single most important determinant of duration of surgery. In conclusion, during the building-up of one’s learning curve of laparoscopic excision of posterior DIE nodules, technique standardization is very important to avoid complications.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Protopapas, A., Giannoulis, G., Chatzipapas, I., Athanasiou, S., Grigoriadis, T., Haidopoulos, D., … Antsaklis, A. (2014). Posterior Deep Infiltrating Endometriotic Nodules: Operative Considerations according to Lesion Size, Location, and Geometry, during One’s Learning Curve. ISRN Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2014, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/853902

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free