Advertisement

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 298, Issue 5, pp 991–999 | Cite as

Major and minor complications after resection without bowel resection for deeply infiltrating endometriosis

  • Johannes Lermann
  • Nalan Topal
  • Werner Adler
  • Thomas Hildebrandt
  • Stefan P. Renner
  • Matthias W. Beckmann
  • Stefanie Burghaus
Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

To analyze major and minor complications following surgery for deeply infiltrating endometriosis including long-term impairment of intestinal, bladder, and sexual function.

Methods

Patients who had undergone resection for deeply infiltrating endometriosis without anterior rectal resection between 2001 and 2011 were included (n = 134). Clinical and surgical data, as well as minor and major complications, were recorded. A questionnaire was sent to the patients and to a healthy control group (n = 100).

Results

Major complications occurred in 3.7% and minor complications in 12.7% of the patients. Surgical revision was necessary in five cases. The questionnaire response rate was 66.4%, with a mean follow-up period of 75.6 months. Weak urinary flow was reported by 26.4% of the patients; a feeling of residual urine by 16.1%; constipation by 13.5%; more than one bowel movement/day by 16.9%; insufficient lubrication during intercourse by 30.3%. The findings for weak urinary flow, feeling of residual urine, and insufficient lubrication differed significantly from the control group. Subgroup analysis did not identify any statistical associations between questionnaire responses and dyspareunia or dysmenorrhea as reasons for surgery, or previous endometriosis surgery in the patient’s history.

Conclusions

The major and minor complication rates were consistent with or lower than the literature data. Few studies have investigated complication rates associated with treatment for endometriosis in the sacrouterine ligaments and/or the rectovaginal septum. The high rates of impaired bladder function and sexual function after endometriosis surgery, as well as inadequate data, make further prospective studies on this topic necessary.

Keywords

Deeply infiltrating endometriosis Minor complications Rectovaginal septum Major complications Bladder function Sexual function 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The contribution of N. Topal to this publication was performed in partial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree of Doctor of Medicine. Parts of the study published here have been used for her doctoral thesis at the Medical Faculty of the Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU).

Author contributions

JL: project development, manuscript writing, data analysis. NT: data collection, postgraduate research. WA: statistician. TH: data collection. SPR: project development. MWB: data analysis. SB: data analysis, project development.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

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.

Informed consent

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

References

  1. 1.
    Ulrich U et al (2014) National German guideline (S2k): guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis: long version—AWMF Registry No. 015-045. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 74(12):1104–1118CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Renner SP et al (2017) Major and minor complications after anterior rectal resection for deeply infiltrating endometriosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 295(5):1277–1285CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Cicco C et al (2011) Bowel resection for deep endometriosis: a systematic review. BJOG 118(3):285–291CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Angioli R et al (2014) Surgical treatment of rectovaginal endometriosis with extensive vaginal infiltration: results of a systematic three-step vagino-laparoscopic approach. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 173:83–87CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Minelli L et al (2010) Laparoscopic conservative surgery for stage IV symptomatic endometriosis: short-term surgical complications. Fertil Steril 94(4):1218–1222CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chapron C et al (2001) Laparoscopically assisted vaginal management of deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectovaginal septum. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 80(4):349–354PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cornillie FJ et al (1990) Deeply infiltrating pelvic endometriosis: histology and clinical significance. Fertil Steril 53(6):978–983CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koninckx PR et al (1991) Suggestive evidence that pelvic endometriosis is a progressive disease, whereas deeply infiltrating endometriosis is associated with pelvic pain. Fertil Steril 55(4):759–765CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Classification of endometriosis (1979) The American Fertility Society. Fertil Steril 32(6):633–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Canis M, Donnez JG, Guzick DS et al (1997) Revised American Society for reproductive medicine classification of endometriosis: 1996. Fertil Steril 67(5):817–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tuttlies F et al (2005) ENZIAN-score, a classification of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Zentralbl Gynakol 127(5):275–281CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson NP et al (2017) World endometriosis society consensus on the classification of endometriosis. Hum Reprod 32(2):315–324CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baessler K, Junginger B (2011) Validation of a pelvic floor questionnaire with improvement and satisfaction scales to assess symptom severity, bothersomeness and quality of life before and after pelvic floor therapy. Aktuelle Urol 42(5):316–322CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baessler K et al (2009) Australian pelvic floor questionnaire: a validated interviewer-administered pelvic floor questionnaire for routine clinic and research. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20(2):149–158CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG (2009) The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications. Ann Surg 250(2):177–186CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gehrich A et al (2007) Establishing a mean postvoid residual volume in asymptomatic perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol 110(4):827–832CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Team RC (2013) The R project for statistical computingGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vercellini P et al (2012) “I can’t get no satisfaction”: deep dyspareunia and sexual functioning in women with rectovaginal endometriosis. Fertil Steril 98(6):1503–1511CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ebert AD et al (2013) Implementation of certified endometriosis centers: 5-year experience in German-speaking Europe. Gynecol Obstet Invest 76(1):4–9CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chapron C, Fritel X, Dubuisson JB (1999) Fertility after laparoscopic management of deep endometriosis infiltrating the uterosacral ligaments. Hum Reprod 14(2):329–332CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Di Donato N et al (2014) Prevalence of adenomyosis in women undergoing surgery for endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 181:289–293CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Naftalin J et al (2012) How common is adenomyosis? A prospective study of prevalence using transvaginal ultrasound in a gynaecology clinic. Hum Reprod 27(12):3432–3439CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Setala M et al (2012) Sexual functioning, quality of life and pelvic pain 12 months after endometriosis surgery including vaginal resection. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 91(6):692–698CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Deffieux X et al (2007) Voiding dysfunction after surgical resection of deeply infiltrating endometriosis: pathophysiology and management. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 35(Suppl 1):S8–S13PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Abbott JA et al (2003) The effects and effectiveness of laparoscopic excision of endometriosis: a prospective study with 2–5 year follow-up. Hum Reprod 18(9):1922–1927CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fritzer N et al (2016) When sex is not on fire: a prospective multicentre study evaluating the short-term effects of radical resection of endometriosis on quality of sex life and dyspareunia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 197:36–40CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Garry R, Clayton R, Hawe J (2000) The effect of endometriosis and its radical laparoscopic excision on quality of life indicators. BJOG 107(1):44–54CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University HospitalFriedrich Alexander University of Erlangen–NurembergErlangenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyKlinikum BayreuthBayreuthGermany
  3. 3.Department of Biometry and EpidemiologyFriedrich Alexander University of Erlangen–NurembergErlangenGermany
  4. 4.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyKlinikverbund Südwest, Klinikum Sindelfingen-BöblingenBöblingenGermany

Personalised recommendations