Cited by 435Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Role of Laparoscopy in Chronic Pelvic Pain: Promise and Pitfalls

HOWARD, FRED M.·1993·Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey

Abstract

Published studies relating to the usefulness of diagnostic and operative laparoscopy in women with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) were reviewed. This revealed that approximately 40 per cent of all laparoscopies were done for CPP. However, the definition of CPP was found to be nebulous and inconsistent, and that muddled definitive conclusions about patient diagnoses and treatments. The following definition of CPP was proposed: nonmenstrual pain of 3 or more months duration that localizes to the anatomic pelvis and is severe enough to cause functional disability and require medical or surgical treatment. A survey of published reports showed laparoscopically diagnosable abnormalities in 61 per cent of patients, compared with abnormalities in 28 per cent of women without CPP. Studies in adolescents were also reviewed and showed that adolescents with CPP also had significant laparoscopically diagnosed abnormalities, with 78 per cent showing some pathology, especially endometriosis (40 per cent). Endometriosis, pelvic adhesions, chronic pelvic inflammatory disease, and ovarian cysts were the diagnoses most commonly made via laparoscopy in CPP patients. The potential roles of each of these abnormalities in CPP were discussed, as well as the results of laparoscopic treatment of each disease. Laparoscopy was also found to have a limited role in women with CPP after hysterectomy or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, with usefulness in diagnosing and treating adhesions and residual ovary syndrome, although its role in ovarian remnant syndrome was uncertain. Overall, the data showed that less than 50 per cent of women with CPP were helped by diagnostic and operative laparoscopy, stressing the need for both physicians and patients to recognize that laparoscopy is neither the ultimate evaluation nor the panacea for CPP.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00006254-199306000-00001

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 435

Metadata

Authors
HOWARD, F. M.
Affiliations
University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
HOWARD, FRED M.
Venue
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey
Published
1993-06
Volume
48
Issue
6
Pages
357-387
ISSN
0029-7828 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2131501232
Cited by
434
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 22
FWCI
6.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey (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 › Surgery › Intestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Keywords
chronic pelvic pain, diagnostic laparoscopy, laparoscopic surgery, endometriosis, pelvic adhesions, chronic pelvic inflammatory disease, ovarian cysts, ovarian remnant syndrome, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, adolescents
MeSH terms
Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, Chronic Disease, Endometriosis, Female, Genital Diseases, Female, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Ovarian Cysts, Pain, Pain Measurement, Postoperative Pain, Pelvis, Laparoscopy, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies

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