患者对腹腔镜子宫内膜异位症切除术与消融术的感知和体验:症状和生活质量结果的众包比较评估。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of minimally invasive gynecology Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014
Amital Isaac, Theodoros Kapetanakis, Erica Thibeault, Luke Chatburn, Malcolm Mackenzie
{"title":"患者对腹腔镜子宫内膜异位症切除术与消融术的感知和体验:症状和生活质量结果的众包比较评估。","authors":"Amital Isaac, Theodoros Kapetanakis, Erica Thibeault, Luke Chatburn, Malcolm Mackenzie","doi":"10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study objective: </strong>To compare laparoscopic Ablation and Excision in terms of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes as perceived by endometriosis patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A Cohort, Method comparison Questionnaire-based study SETTING: Endometriosis-focused Social Media site PATIENTS: Endometriosis patients with history of Laparoscopic Ablation and Excision.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>On-line questionnaire focused on pre and post procedure (ablation and excision) outcomes across 63 measures in 5 realms: Physical Symptoms, Functional Impact, Psycho-emotional Impact, Social/Sexual Impact, Economic/Educational Impact.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>232 respondents with surgical history that included laparoscopic ablation and excision (without concomitant or interposed hysterectomy) identified for ablation only physical symptom improvement of 11.3% and 8.5% for dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia respectively. Ablation provided no significant improvement in any other physical symptom measure. Excision was identified as providing improvements across all symptoms ranging from 28% to 46%. In terms of Functional Impact, ablation provided non-significant improvements or worsening of status. Excision demonstrated significant improvement for patients across most measures of Functional Impact. In terms of Psycho-emotional Impact, a worsening of QoL status is identified in 23 of 24 measures following ablation. Excision demonstrated improvement in 22 of 24 measures. For Social-Sexual Impact, ablation resulted in worsened status across all measures with excision demonstrating improvements in all measures, significantly so in most. For Economic/Educational Impact, significant worsening of measures or insignificant improvements were demonstrated following ablation. Excision demonstrated significant improvement in most measures. In all realms, pre-Excision status was worse than pre-Ablation. Allowing for a more focused comparison of ablation and excision, 113 respondents with a surgical history of ablation sequentially followed by excision demonstrated outcomes similar to the larger group: overall worsening of status resulting from ablation and overall improvement in status following excision with pre-Excision morbidity higher than pre-Ablation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic endometriosis excision after having undergone endometriosis ablation, the former demonstrated greater beneficial effect over a broad spectrum of symptom and QoL measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":16397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Perception and Experience of Laparoscopic Excision vs. Ablation of endometriosis: a crowd-sourced comparative evaluation of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Amital Isaac, Theodoros Kapetanakis, Erica Thibeault, Luke Chatburn, Malcolm Mackenzie\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study objective: </strong>To compare laparoscopic Ablation and Excision in terms of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes as perceived by endometriosis patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A Cohort, Method comparison Questionnaire-based study SETTING: Endometriosis-focused Social Media site PATIENTS: Endometriosis patients with history of Laparoscopic Ablation and Excision.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>On-line questionnaire focused on pre and post procedure (ablation and excision) outcomes across 63 measures in 5 realms: Physical Symptoms, Functional Impact, Psycho-emotional Impact, Social/Sexual Impact, Economic/Educational Impact.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>232 respondents with surgical history that included laparoscopic ablation and excision (without concomitant or interposed hysterectomy) identified for ablation only physical symptom improvement of 11.3% and 8.5% for dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia respectively. Ablation provided no significant improvement in any other physical symptom measure. Excision was identified as providing improvements across all symptoms ranging from 28% to 46%. In terms of Functional Impact, ablation provided non-significant improvements or worsening of status. Excision demonstrated significant improvement for patients across most measures of Functional Impact. In terms of Psycho-emotional Impact, a worsening of QoL status is identified in 23 of 24 measures following ablation. Excision demonstrated improvement in 22 of 24 measures. For Social-Sexual Impact, ablation resulted in worsened status across all measures with excision demonstrating improvements in all measures, significantly so in most. For Economic/Educational Impact, significant worsening of measures or insignificant improvements were demonstrated following ablation. Excision demonstrated significant improvement in most measures. In all realms, pre-Excision status was worse than pre-Ablation. Allowing for a more focused comparison of ablation and excision, 113 respondents with a surgical history of ablation sequentially followed by excision demonstrated outcomes similar to the larger group: overall worsening of status resulting from ablation and overall improvement in status following excision with pre-Excision morbidity higher than pre-Ablation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic endometriosis excision after having undergone endometriosis ablation, the former demonstrated greater beneficial effect over a broad spectrum of symptom and QoL measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2024.10.014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的比较腹腔镜消融术和切除术对子宫内膜异位症患者症状和生活质量的影响:设计:队列研究,方法比较,问卷调查:患者: 有子宫内膜异位症病史的子宫内膜异位症患者:有腹腔镜消融术和切除术病史的子宫内膜异位症患者:干预措施:在线问卷调查,重点关注手术前后(消融术和切除术)的疗效,包括5个方面的63项指标:测量指标和主要结果:232 名受访者的手术史包括腹腔镜消融术和切除术(未同时或插入子宫切除术),消融术仅改善了痛经和月经过多的身体症状,分别为 11.3% 和 8.5%。消融术在其他身体症状方面没有明显改善。切除术对所有症状都有改善,改善程度从 28% 到 46% 不等。在功能影响方面,消融术没有明显改善或恶化。切除术则在大多数功能影响指标上为患者带来了明显改善。就心理情感影响而言,在 24 项测量中,有 23 项显示消融术后患者的生活质量有所下降。而切除术则在 24 项指标中的 22 项指标上有所改善。在社会-性影响方面,消融术导致所有测量指标的状况恶化,而切除术则在所有测量指标中均有所改善,其中大部分指标改善显著。在经济/教育影响方面,消融术后各项指标明显恶化或改善不明显。切除术在大多数指标上都有明显改善。在所有方面,消融术前的状况都比消融术前差。为了对消融术和切除术进行更有针对性的比较,113 名受访者的手术史是先消融后切除,其结果与更大的群体相似:消融术后整体状况恶化,切除术后整体状况改善,切除术前的发病率高于消融术前:结论:在这组接受过子宫内膜异位症消融术后又接受腹腔镜子宫内膜异位症切除术的患者中,前者在各种症状和生活质量方面表现出更大的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Patient Perception and Experience of Laparoscopic Excision vs. Ablation of endometriosis: a crowd-sourced comparative evaluation of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes.

Study objective: To compare laparoscopic Ablation and Excision in terms of symptom and Quality of Life outcomes as perceived by endometriosis patients.

Design: A Cohort, Method comparison Questionnaire-based study SETTING: Endometriosis-focused Social Media site PATIENTS: Endometriosis patients with history of Laparoscopic Ablation and Excision.

Interventions: On-line questionnaire focused on pre and post procedure (ablation and excision) outcomes across 63 measures in 5 realms: Physical Symptoms, Functional Impact, Psycho-emotional Impact, Social/Sexual Impact, Economic/Educational Impact.

Measurements and main results: 232 respondents with surgical history that included laparoscopic ablation and excision (without concomitant or interposed hysterectomy) identified for ablation only physical symptom improvement of 11.3% and 8.5% for dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia respectively. Ablation provided no significant improvement in any other physical symptom measure. Excision was identified as providing improvements across all symptoms ranging from 28% to 46%. In terms of Functional Impact, ablation provided non-significant improvements or worsening of status. Excision demonstrated significant improvement for patients across most measures of Functional Impact. In terms of Psycho-emotional Impact, a worsening of QoL status is identified in 23 of 24 measures following ablation. Excision demonstrated improvement in 22 of 24 measures. For Social-Sexual Impact, ablation resulted in worsened status across all measures with excision demonstrating improvements in all measures, significantly so in most. For Economic/Educational Impact, significant worsening of measures or insignificant improvements were demonstrated following ablation. Excision demonstrated significant improvement in most measures. In all realms, pre-Excision status was worse than pre-Ablation. Allowing for a more focused comparison of ablation and excision, 113 respondents with a surgical history of ablation sequentially followed by excision demonstrated outcomes similar to the larger group: overall worsening of status resulting from ablation and overall improvement in status following excision with pre-Excision morbidity higher than pre-Ablation.

Conclusion: In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic endometriosis excision after having undergone endometriosis ablation, the former demonstrated greater beneficial effect over a broad spectrum of symptom and QoL measures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, formerly titled The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, is an international clinical forum for the exchange and dissemination of ideas, findings and techniques relevant to gynecologic endoscopy and other minimally invasive procedures. The Journal, which presents research, clinical opinions and case reports from the brightest minds in gynecologic surgery, is an authoritative source informing practicing physicians of the latest, cutting-edge developments occurring in this emerging field.
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic closure of rectosigmoid injury with OTS clip after laparoscopic surgery for extensive endometriosis. Cover 1 Editorial Board Accessory Obturator Nerve During vNOTES Pelvic Lymphadenectomy Retroperitoneal Cystic Endometriosis Incidentally Found at Time of Hysterectomy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1