Cited by 10Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management

The Impact of Laparoscopic Surgery on Fertility Outcomes in Patients with Minimal/Mild Endometriosis

Open access
Grigoriadis, Georgios, Roman, Horace, Gkrozou, Fani, Daniilidis, Angelos·2024·Journal of Clinical Medicine

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Minimal/mild endometriosis (MME) is independently associated with reduced fecundity rates. In this review article, we discuss the role of laparoscopic surgery in enhancing the fertility outcomes of patients with MME. Laparoscopic management of MME enhances fecundity and increases the chances of spontaneous conception in appropriately selected cases. However, laparoscopy cannot be routinely recommended in asymptomatic patients with the sole purpose of diagnosing and treating potentially present MME. Equally, and based on existing information, the laparoscopic management of MME cannot be routinely recommended prior to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) attempts due to the lack of robust and beneficial evidence. Because an overlap between unexplained infertility and MME cases likely exists, the development of reliable, widely available, non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of MME may revolutionise the management of cases currently classified as unexplained infertility. In a disease as diverse as endometriosis, management decisions should be based on a multitude of factors. Future studies should focus on reporting the outcomes of interventions for MME on fertility and obstetric outcomes, clearly differentiating between disease stages and phenotypes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jcm13164817

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 111 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grigoriadis, G., Roman, H., Gkrozou, F., & Daniilidis, A.
Affiliations
  • Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • University of Ioannina (GR)
Corresponding author
Daniilidis, Angelos
Venue
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-08-15
Volume
13
Issue
16
Pages
4817
ISSN
2077-0383 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401611206
Cited by
10
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • 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
laparoscopic surgery, fecundity, fertility outcomes, spontaneous conception, unexplained infertility, in vitro fertilization, endometriosis phenotypes

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