Cited by 54Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management

Laparoscopic conservative surgery for stage IV symptomatic endometriosis: short-term surgical complications

Open access
Minelli, Luca, Ceccaroni, Marcello, Ruffo, Giacomo, Bruni, Francesco, Pomini, Paola, Pontrelli, Giovanni, Rolla, Martino, Scioscia, Marco·2010·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

Objective To study severe endometriosis as a cause of pelvic pain, which represents one of the most challenging disorders in gynecology. Design Retrospective study. Setting Teaching hospital. Patient(s) A total of 1,363 women with severe endometriosis (revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine [rASRM] stage IV). Interventions A detailed survey of all patients with severe endometriosis (rASRM stage IV) who underwent laparoscopy at our center between January 2004 and December 2007 was carried out. Main outcome measure(s) Clinical and surgical data were retrieved and assessed according to the extent of surgery performed. Intraoperative, ultra-short, and short-term clinical complications were assessed. Results A total of 1,201 women underwent laparoscopic radical surgery with excision of all visible endometriotic lesions, with a significant improvement of symptoms at 1-month follow-up evaluation. The overall intraoperative complication rate was 2.0%. The morbidity was significantly increased when bowel surgery was performed, with a risk of intraoperative complications that was threefold higher. Of the patients who had bowel surgery, 18 (4.1%) required reintervention within the first week after surgery. Conclusion(s) We report on the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic eradication of all visible implants in cases of rASRM stage IV endometriosis when surgery is performed in a referral center.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.08.035

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Minelli, L., Ceccaroni, M., Ruffo, G., Bruni, F., Pomini, P., Pontrelli, G., Rolla, M., & Scioscia, M.
Affiliations
  • Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria (IT)
  • University of Parma (IT)
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
Corresponding author
Scioscia, Marco
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-09
Volume
94
Issue
4
Pages
1218-1222
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2072431366
Cited by
54
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
endometriosis, stage IV endometriosis, laparoscopic surgery, conservative surgery, surgical complications, intraoperative complications, intestinal surgery, pelvic pain, reintervention
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Infertility, Female, Intestinal Diseases, Laparoscopy, Postoperative Complications, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Comorbidity, Treatment Outcome, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review