Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Monopolar versus bipolar laparoscopic ovarian drilling in clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovaries (PCO): a preliminary study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Gynecological Surgery

01 September 2022 Retraction Note: The Publisher has retracted this article. Concerns were raised about the statistical analysis of the results presented in Tables 2 and 3; the authors did not provide a response when asked about these concerns and stated that the raw data were no longer available. Assessment of the concerns by an independent expert concluded that there are inconsistencies in data analysis. The authors' institution was contacted with a request to investigate but did not respond. None of the authors have responded to correspondence from the Publisher about this retraction.

Abstract

The objective of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) utilizing monopolar versus bipolar needle in clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovaries (PCO) in infertile women. This study is a prospective randomized comparative diagnostic trial. The procedures were performed in an endoscopic unit of a tertiary care referral facility and university hospital. Eighty clomiphene-resistant PCO patients were randomly assigned by using a computerized random table into group A and group B for monopolar and bipolar LOD of 40 patients in each group, respectively. The intervention was LOD using monopolar or bipolar needle in groups A and B, respectively. The main outcome measures are resumption of regular menstruation, spontaneous ovulation, and pregnancy. Both groups showed a significant postoperative improvement of menstrual patterns and hormonal profiles if compared to preoperative levels without significant difference between both groups. Spontaneous ovulation resumed in 13 (32.5 %) and 25 (62 %), p = 0.007, while spontaneous pregnancy within 1 year after LOD occurred in 9 (22.5 %) and 18 (45 %) cases (p = 0.033) in both groups, respectively. Both monopolar and bipolar needles are effective tools for LOD in clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant PCO infertile patients as a second-line therapy. Utilizing bipolar LOD is superior to monopolar LOD due to a significantly higher postoperative incidence of resumption of spontaneous ovulation and spontaneous pregnancy. Theoretical less adhesion formation following bipolar LOD requires a second-look laparoscopy study. In the meantime, spread of bipolar LOD should be encouraged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 01 September 2022

    Retraction Note: The Publisher has retracted this article. Concerns were raised about the statistical analysis of the results presented in Tables 2 and 3; the authors did not provide a response when asked about these concerns and stated that the raw data were no longer available. Assessment of the concerns by an independent expert concluded that there are inconsistencies in data analysis. The authors' institution was contacted with a request to investigate but did not respond. None of the authors have responded to correspondence from the Publisher about this retraction.

References

  1. Ehrman DA (2005) Polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 352:1223–1236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Flyckt RL, Goldberg JM (2011) Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome. Semin Reprod Med 29:138–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abu Hashim H, Al-Inany H, De Vos M, Tournaye H (2013) Three decades after Gjönnaess’s laparoscopic ovarian drilling for treatment of PCOS; what do we know? An evidence-based approach. Arch Gynecol Obstet 288(2):409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lebbi E, Ben Tamemi R, Fadhlaoui A, Fekri A (2015) Ovarian drilling in PCOS: is it really useful? Frontiers in Surgery July 2:30

    Google Scholar 

  5. Farquhar C, Lilford RJ, Marjoribanks J, Vandekerckhove P (2007) Laparoscopic ‘drilling’ by diathermy or laser for ovulation induction in anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD001122

  6. Fernandez H, Watrelot A, Alby JD, Kadoch J, Gervaise A, deTayrac R, Frydman R (2004) Fertility after ovarian drilling by transvaginal fertiloscopy for treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11(3):374–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group Human Reproduction 2003;19, 1, 41–47

  8. Ahmed F.Amin, Diaa-Eldeen M. Abd El Aal, Atef M. Darwish, Abdel-Raheim M. A. Meki (2003) Evaluation of the impact of laparoscopic ovarian drilling on Doppler indices of ovarian stromal blood flow, serum vascular endothelial growth factor, and insulin-like growth factor-1 in women with polycystic ovary syndrome Fertility Sterility 79,4:938–4.

  9. Nahuis MJ, Oude Lohuis E, Kose N, Bayram N, Hompes P, Oosterhuis GJ, Kaaijk EM, Cohlen BJ, Bossuyt PP, van der Veen F, Mol BW, van Wely M (2012) Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic electrocautery of the ovaries versus ovulation induction with recombinant FSH in clomiphene citrate-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome: an economic evaluation. Hum Reprod 27(12):3577–3582

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Aflatoonian MD, Asgharnia M, Tayebi N (2007) Comparison of laparoscopic drilling by diathermy and laser for ovulation induction in clomiphene citrate-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Middle East Fertil Soc J 12(2):96–99

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gordts S, Campo R, Rombauts L, Brosens I (1998) Transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy as an outpatient procedure for infertility investigation. Hum Reprod 13:99–103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Darwish AM, Abdel Aleem MA, Ismail AM (2009) Risk of adhesions formation following microsurgical monopolar laparoscopic ovarian drilling: a comparative study. Gynecological Surgery 2, 6 (9) 2, 135–141

  13. Chiesa-Montadou S, Rongieres C, Garbin O, Nisand I (2003) About two complications of ovarian drilling by fertiloscopy. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 31:844–846

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fernandez H, Faivre E, Gervaise A, Deffieux X (2010) Laparoscopic ovarian drilling using a 5-French bipolar energy probe. Fertil Steril 94:740–741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Amer SA, Li TC, Ledger WL (2009) The value of measuring anti-Mullerian hormone in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing laparoscopic ovarian diathermy. Hum Reprod 24:2760–2766

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Dudhat A (2012) Laparoscopic ovarian drilling and its outcome. Int Collab Res Intern Med Public Health 4(12):2075–2083

    Google Scholar 

  17. Li TC, Saravelos H, Chow MS, Chisabingo R (1998) Factors affecting the outcome of laparoscopic ovarian drilling for polycystic ovarian syndrome in women with anovulatory infertility. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 105:338–344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sharma M, Kriplani A, Agarwal N (2006) Laparoscopic bipolar versus unipolar ovarian drilling in infertile women with resistant. Surg J Gynecol Surg 2006 22(3):105–111

    Google Scholar 

  19. Amer SA, Li TC, Ledger WL (2004) Ovulation induction using laparoscopic ovarian drilling in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: predictors of success. Hum Reprod 19:1719–1724

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Merchant RN (1996) Treatment of polycystic ovary disease with laparoscopic low-watt bipolar electrocoagulation of the ovaries. J Am AssocGynecol Laparosc 3:503–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Women’s Health University Hospital, Assiut, Egypt

    Atef M. Darwish, AboBakr Metwally, Mammdoh M. Shaaban & Shymaa Mohamed

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Woman’s Health University Hospital, 71111 Assiut, P.O. Box: (1), Assiut, Egypt

    Atef M. Darwish

Authors
  1. Atef M. Darwish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. AboBakr Metwally
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mammdoh M. Shaaban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shymaa Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atef M. Darwish.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Funding

This study was not funded.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Financial support

None.

Additional information

This article has been retracted. Please see the retraction notice for more detail:https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-022-01101-5

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Darwish, A.M., Metwally, A., Shaaban, M.M. et al. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Monopolar versus bipolar laparoscopic ovarian drilling in clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovaries (PCO): a preliminary study. Gynecol Surg 13, 179–185 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0943-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0943-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation