COMPARISON OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY AND LAPAROTOMY IN THE TREATMENT OF ADNEXAL MASSES

Study Objective. To compare the outcome of laparoscopic treatment of adnexal masses with treatment by laparotomy. The procedures, their duration, and associated complications also were evaluated. Design. Women were randomized to undergo either procedure based on the ward To which they were admitted. Setting. A university teaching hospital. Patients. The 192 patients were admitted with a preoperative diagnosis of adnexal mass. Interventions. Surgical procedures were cystectomy, salpingectomy, oophorectomy, and unilateral or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Organ-preserving techniques were used wherever possible. All tissue specimens were examined histologically. Measurements and Main Results. The mean duration of surgery was statistically not significantly different between the groups, 96.8 minutes for minimally invasive surgery, and 116 minutes for laparotomy. Organ preservation did reach statistical significance at 65.7% and 17.2%, respectively (p < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity was statistically lower in patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures. Preoperative tumor marker levels did not correlate well with postoperative histology. One woman in the laparotomy group had histologically proved ovarian cancer. Minimally invasive surgery was converted to laparotomy in three patients in whom malignancy was suspected at the start of operation. Conclusions. Laparoscopic management of adnexal masses has definite advantages over laparotomy, for example, lower postoperative morbidity. In addition, intraoperative endoscopic diagnosis is highly accurate, and the frequency of unnecessary procedures is lower.