Ovarian endometriomas have a negative impact on a patient’s reproductive potential and are likely to cause a reduction in ovarian reserve. The most commonly employed ovarian reserve parameters are anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and antral follicular count (AFC). Surgical management options of endometrioma include cystectomy, ablative methods, ethanol sclerotherapy and combined techniques. The optimal surgical approach remains a matter of debate. Our review aimed to summarize the literature on the impact of surgical management of endometrioma on AMH, AFC and fertility outcomes. Cystectomy may reduce recurrence rates and increase chances of spontaneous conception. However, a postoperative reduction in AMH is to be anticipated, despite there being evidence of recovery during follow-up. The reduction in ovarian reserve is likely multi-factorial. Cystectomy does not appear to significantly reduce, and may even increase, AFC. Ablative methods achieve an ovarian-tissue-sparing effect, and improved ovarian reserve, compared to cystectomy, has been demonstrated. A single study reported on AMH and AFC post sclerotherapy, and both were significantly reduced. AMH levels may be useful in predicting the chances of conception postoperatively. None of the aforementioned approaches has a clearly demonstrated superiority in terms of overall chances of conception. Surgical management of endometrioma may, overall, improve the probability of pregnancy. Evidence on its value before medically assisted reproduction (MAR) is conflicting; however, a combination of surgery followed by MAR may achieve the optimal fertility outcome. In view of the complexity of available evidence, individualization of care, combined with optimal surgical technique, is highly recommended.

Seroma or lymphocele remains the most common complication after mastectomy and lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Many different techniques are available to prevent this complication: wound drainage, reduction of the dead space by flap fixation, use of various types of energy, external compression dressings, shoulder immobilization or physical activity, as well as numerous drugs and glues. We searched MEDLINE, clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for publications addressing the issue of prevention of lymphocele or seroma after mastectomy and axillary lymphadenectomy. Quality was assessed using Hawker’s quality assessment tool. Incidence of seroma or lymphocele were collected. Fifteen randomized controlled trials including a total of 1766 patients undergoing radical mastectomy and axillary lymphadenectomy for breast cancer were retrieved. The incidence of lymphocele or seroma in the study population was 24.2% (411/1698): 25.2% (232/920) in the test groups and 23.0% (179/778) in the control groups. Neither modification of surgical technique (RR 0.86; 95% CI [0.72, 1.03]) nor application of a medical treatment (RR 0.96; 95% CI [0.72, 1.29]) was effective in preventing lymphocele. On the contrary, decreasing the drainage time increased the risk of lymphocele (RR 1.88; 95% CI [1.43, 2.48). There was no publication bias but the studies were of medium to low quality. To conclude, despite the heterogeneity of study designs, drainage appears to be the most effective technique, although the overall quality of the data is low.

Could anogenital distance (AGD) be a non-invasive marker of endometriosis and correlated to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine revised score (r-ASRM) and ENZIAN classifications? Surgically and histologically proven endometriosis is associated with a short AGD in women of reproductive age but not correlated either to the severity or to the location of the disease. AGD is a marker of intrauterine androgen exposure and exposure to oestrogen-like chemicals such as phthalates. Moreover, exposure to endocrine disruptors, such as organochlorine chemicals, is associated with endometriosis. It has been suggested that a short AGD in women is associated with an increased risk of endometriosis based on clinical and ultrasound exams. A prospective cohort study was conducted from January 2018 to June 2019 in a tertiary-care centre including 168 adult women undergoing pelvic surgery. Of the 168 women included, 98 patients had endometriosis (endometriosis group) and 70 did not (non-endometriosis group). An operator (not the surgeon) measured the distance from the clitoral surface to the anus (AGD-AC) and from the posterior fourchette to the anus (AGD-AF) before surgery using a millimetre accuracy ruler. Endometriosis was diagnosed on exploration of the abdominopelvic cavity, and the r-ASRM and ENZIAN scores were calculated. All removed tissues underwent pathological examination. Mean (±SD) AGD-AF measurements were 21.5 mm (±6.4) and 32.3 mm (±8.1), and average AGD-AC measurements were 100.9 mm (±20.6) and 83.8 mm (±12.9) in the endometriosis and non-endometriosis groups (P < 0.001), respectively. Mean AGD-AF and AGD-AC measurements were not related to r-ASRM stage (P = 0.73 and 0.80, respectively) or ENZIAN score (P = 0.62 and 0.21, respectively). AGD-AF had a better predictive value than AGD-AC for discriminating the presence of endometriosis (AUC = 0.840 (95% CI 0.782–0.898) and 0.756 (95% CI 0.684–0.828)), respectively. For AGD-AF, an optimal cut-off of 20 mm had a specificity of 0.986 (95% CI 0.923–0.999), sensitivity of 0.306 (95% CI 26.1–31.6) and positive predictive value of 0.969 (95% CI 0.826–0.998). In multivariable analysis, the diagnosis of endometriosis was the only variable independently associated with the AGD-AF (β = −9.66 mm 95% CI −12.20–−7.12), P < 0.001). The sample size was relatively small with a high proportion of patients with colorectal endometriosis reflecting the activity of an expert centre. Furthermore, we did not include adolescents and the AGD-AF measurement could be particularly relevant in this population. The measurement of AGD could be a useful non-invasive tool to predict endometriosis. This could be especially relevant for adolescents and virgin women to avoid diagnostic laparoscopy and empiric treatment. None.

Background/Aim: Magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound (US) fusion imaging (MR-US fusion) is already used to guide prostate biopsies and has been proven accurate for diagnosing cervical cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility and performance of MR-US fusion for characterizing adnexal masses. Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted between 2014 and 2018 including women referred to our Gynaecological Oncology Department for characterization of an adnexal mass (n=106). Performance of MR-US fusion was evaluated in a subgroup of patients who underwent surgery (n=26). Two readers, blinded to final histology, performed and rated US findings according to the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules score, MR according to Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Data System Magnetic score, and MR-US fusion through a tailored score. The reference outcome was the final pathology. Results: MR-US fusion had a sensitivity of 100% (95%CI=80-100), specificity of 89% (95%CI=52-99), positive likelihood ratio of 9 (95%CI=1.4-57), and accuracy of 96% (95%CI=80-99). Conclusion: MR-US fusion is feasible for characterizing adnexal masses to predict ovarian cancer.