|
1
|
Cianci S, Gulino FA, Palmara V, La Verde M, Ronsini C, Romeo P, Occhipinti S, Incognito GG, Capozzi VA, Restaino S, Vizzielli G, Palumbo M. Exploring Surgical Strategies for Uterine Fibroid Treatment: A Comprehensive Review of Literature on Open and Minimally Invasive Approaches. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2023; 60:64. [PMID: 38256325 PMCID: PMC10820219 DOI: 10.3390/medicina60010064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2023] [Revised: 12/19/2023] [Accepted: 12/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Uterine myomas represent one of the most prevalent pathologies affecting the female population. These benign neoplasms originate from the smooth muscular cells of the uterus, and they can be either single or multiple. Often associated with debilitating symptoms such as pelvic heaviness, pain, constipation, and urinary dysfunctions, the surgical management of myomectomy exhibits considerable variability. This diversity in approaches is influenced by factors such as the number and size of myomas, the patient's age, and overall clinical conditions. This study aims to elucidate and compare the advantages and disadvantages of different surgical approaches, specifically endoscopic procedures versus open surgery, providing valuable insights for clinical decision making. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive bibliographic search spanning from 2013 to 2023 was systematically conducted across databases including Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search utilized keywords such as "myomectomy laparoscopic and open", "myomectomy open and minimally invasive", "myomectomy open and laparoscopic", and "myomectomy open vs. laparoscopic." The research methodology, along with predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, was established prior to the search, ensuring a systematic and rigorous approach. Subsequently, data analysis was carried out. Results: Following the study selection process, 25 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this analysis. The average numbers of myomas were 3.7 (ranging from 1 to 13.7) and 5.4 (ranging from 1 to 13.5) for the minimally invasive surgery and open surgery groups, respectively. In terms of myoma size, the total averages across studies were 7 cm (ranging from 4.8 to 14) for the minimally invasive group and 8 cm (ranging from 3.9 to 11.2) for the open surgery group. The average pregnancy and delivery rates were 29.7% (ranging from 1.8 to 100) for the minimally invasive group and 28.5% (ranging from 1.8 to 100) for the open surgery group. Regarding complications, the average rate was 14.2% (ranging from 0 to 50) for the endoscopic group and 22.3% (ranging from 0 to 60.3) for the laparotomic group. Conclusions: In conclusion, a critical factor influencing the choice of surgical approach is primarily the size and quantity of fibroids. The mini-laparotomic approach emerges as a viable alternative to endoscopy, demonstrating favorable surgical outcomes and aesthetic results. Interestingly, the type of surgical procedure appears to have no significant impact on the pregnancy rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Cianci
- Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood “G. Barresi”, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy; (F.A.G.); (V.P.); (P.R.)
| | - Ferdinando Antonio Gulino
- Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood “G. Barresi”, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy; (F.A.G.); (V.P.); (P.R.)
| | - Vittorio Palmara
- Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood “G. Barresi”, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy; (F.A.G.); (V.P.); (P.R.)
| | - Marco La Verde
- Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy; (M.L.V.); (C.R.)
| | - Carlo Ronsini
- Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy; (M.L.V.); (C.R.)
| | - Paola Romeo
- Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood “G. Barresi”, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy; (F.A.G.); (V.P.); (P.R.)
| | - Sara Occhipinti
- Department of General Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy; (S.O.); (G.G.I.); (M.P.)
| | - Giosuè Giordano Incognito
- Department of General Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy; (S.O.); (G.G.I.); (M.P.)
| | - Vito Andrea Capozzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Parma, 43125 Parma, Italy;
| | - Stefano Restaino
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, “Santa Maria della Misericordia” University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, 33100 Udine, Italy; (S.R.); (G.V.)
| | - Giuseppe Vizzielli
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, “Santa Maria della Misericordia” University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, 33100 Udine, Italy; (S.R.); (G.V.)
- Department of Medicine, University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy
| | - Marco Palumbo
- Department of General Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy; (S.O.); (G.G.I.); (M.P.)
| |
Collapse
|