The outcomes of repeat surgery for recurrent symptomatic endometriosis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose of Review: To evaluate the efficacy of second-line surgery in the management of recurrent endometriosis. Recent Findings: Long-term probability of pain recurrence after repeat conservative surgery for recurrent endometriosis varies between 20 and 40%. The association of presacral neurectomy to the treatment of endometriosis might be effective in reducing midline pain; however, no studies have evaluated this procedure among patients with recurrent disease. The medium-term outcome of hysterectomy for endometriosis-associated pain is quite satisfactory; nevertheless, probability of pain persistence after hysterectomy is 15% and risk of pain worsening 3-5%, with a six times higher risk of further surgery in patients with ovarian preservation as compared to ovarian removal. The conception rate among women undergoing repetitive surgery for recurrent endometriosis associated with infertility is 26%, whereas the overall crude pregnancy rate after a primary procedure is 41%. Summary: Repeat conservative surgery for pelvic pain associated with recurrent endometriosis has the same efficacy and limitations as primary surgery. Conversely, after repeat conservative surgery for infertility, the pregnancy rate is almost half the rate obtained after primary surgery. More data are needed to define the best therapeutic option in women with recurrent endometriosis, in terms of pa n relief, pregnancy rate and patient compliance.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)320-325
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2010

Keywords

  • endometriosis
  • infertility
  • laparoscopic surgery
  • pelvic pain

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Medicine(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The outcomes of repeat surgery for recurrent symptomatic endometriosis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this