Comparison of Laparoscopic Adnexal Mass Extraction Via the Transumbilical and Transvaginal Routes

NCT ID: NCT05421117

Last Updated: 2022-06-16

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

93 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-01-01

Study Completion Date

2020-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Adnexal masses are a common clinical problem encountered in gynecological practice. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for ovarian pathologies has been adopted widely. Its goals are to minimize abdominal incisions and postoperative pain and to prevent incisional complications, such as incisional hernias and adhesions. Compared with open procedures, MIS is associated with faster recovery times, better patient quality of life, and lower postoperative complication rates. The removal of an adnexal mass from the abdominal cavity is performed most commonly using the suprapubic, umbilical, or vaginal route. Apart from these, mini laparoscopy can provide a better cosmetic result without additional operative time or complications. Despite the limited use of mini laparoscopy for gynecological procedures, its use has increased recently.

After excision, an adnexal mass can be removed through a laparoscopic (LS) port using a variety of endoscopic or containment bags. After the mass has been placed in it, the bag is withdrawn, closed, and expelled through the skin incision with simultaneous trocar removal. When a mass is large or cannot be removed through the port, the incision may be enlarged slightly. This situation may yield a cosmetically worse outcome and increases the risk of postoperative complications, such as adhesion, hernia, and increased postoperative pain. Thus, natural orifice surgery (NOS) has emerged for tissue removal in such cases.

This study was performed to compare the transumbilical (TU) and transvaginal (TV) routes for adnexal mass removal from the abdominal cavity

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Surgical Procedure, Unspecified

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

transumbilical (TU) routes

For the TU group, a surgical glove was created bag during the operation as follows: a sterile, surgical latex glove (size 8.5) was double tied at the level of the wrist, the fingers were removed, and a 75-cm purse-string suture was made using a symmetrical knot to form a bag. The glove bag took an average of 10 min to make. It was lubricated with normal saline to remove the talcum powder and then introduced through the 10-mm umbilical port (optic port). The fingers of the glove were removed to facilitate its insertion with the 10-mm trocar and for ease of movement in the abdominal cavity.

Laparoscopic adnexal mass extraction

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Compared with open procedures, Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with faster recovery times, better patient quality of life, and lower postoperative complication rates. The removal of an adnexal mass from the abdominal cavity is performed most commonly using the suprapubic, trans umbilical (TU), or trans vaginal (TV) route.

transvaginal (TV) routes

A curette was placed into the uterine cavity and stabilized with a tenaculum for manipulation of the uterus. After separation of the adnexal mass ligaments, the manipulator was removed to perform TV retrieval. A vaginal retractor was inserted into the vagina to view the cervix and allow removal of the mass via the TV route. The posterior lip of the cervix was grasped with an Allis forceps and then pulled superiorly to expose the posterior vaginal dome. The sampler was inserted into the vagina and pushed gently against the vaginal wall to define the posterior fornix between the uterosacral ligaments. A 1-2-cm transverse TV posterior colpotomy was performed under laparoscopic control using a 3-mm monopolar hook. The sample was pulled into the vagina by holding the bag mouth from the colpotomy with ring forceps. The bag mouth was opened in the vaginal canal and the sample was transferred from the vagina.

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Laparoscopic adnexal mass extraction

Compared with open procedures, Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with faster recovery times, better patient quality of life, and lower postoperative complication rates. The removal of an adnexal mass from the abdominal cavity is performed most commonly using the suprapubic, trans umbilical (TU), or trans vaginal (TV) route.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

-Women who underwent laparoscopic surgery for the removal of benign adnexal masses

Exclusion Criteria

-Patients with missing data about surgery information
Minimum Eligible Age

16 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Erzincan Military Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Kemal GUNGORDUK

Medical Doctor, associate professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

MUGLA-7

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.