Does laparoscopic hysterectomy + bilateral salpingectomy decrease the ovarian reserve more than total abdominal hysterectomy? A cohort study, measuring anti-Müllerian hormone before and after surgery.
Anti-Mullerian hormone
Hysterectomy
Laparoscopy
Laparotomy
Ovarian reserve
Journal
BMC women's health
ISSN: 1472-6874
Titre abrégé: BMC Womens Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088690
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 09 2021
11 09 2021
Historique:
received:
21
04
2021
accepted:
06
09
2021
entrez:
11
9
2021
pubmed:
12
9
2021
medline:
2
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Decreased ovarian function and reserve is one of the complications of hysterectomy. In this study, we aimed to compare anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) levels between total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). In this prospective cohort study, serum levels of AMH were compared between the groups undergoing TAH + bilateral salpingectiomy and TLH, in 66 patients (33 in each group) who referred to the hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for hysterectomy during one years of work. The collected information included age, weight, gravidity, parity, regularity of menstrual cycle, uterine weight, blood loss during surgery, and serum levels of AMH before and 6 months after surgery, compared between groups. Most patients (88% in TAH and 73% in TLH group) aged 40-50 years. Mean age, weight, parity of patients was similar in both groups, while blood loss was significantly less in TLH group (P < 0.01). Median (IQR) of pre-surgical AMH values were 0.40 (0.55) ng/ml in the TLH group and 0.92 (1.23) ng/ml in the TAH group (P = 0.12) that decreased to 0.29 (0.44) ng/ml in the TLH group and 0.15 (0.31) ng/ml in the TAH group (P = 0.02). Also Median (IQR) of the difference between pre and post-surgical AMH values were 0.12 (0.31) and 0.58 (1.17) in TLH and TAH group, respectively (P = 0.003). The serum levels of AMH decreased significantly after both methods of hysterectomy (laparoscopy and laparotomy), while this decrease was greater in TAH group that shows.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Decreased ovarian function and reserve is one of the complications of hysterectomy. In this study, we aimed to compare anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) levels between total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH).
METHODS
In this prospective cohort study, serum levels of AMH were compared between the groups undergoing TAH + bilateral salpingectiomy and TLH, in 66 patients (33 in each group) who referred to the hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for hysterectomy during one years of work. The collected information included age, weight, gravidity, parity, regularity of menstrual cycle, uterine weight, blood loss during surgery, and serum levels of AMH before and 6 months after surgery, compared between groups.
RESULTS
Most patients (88% in TAH and 73% in TLH group) aged 40-50 years. Mean age, weight, parity of patients was similar in both groups, while blood loss was significantly less in TLH group (P < 0.01). Median (IQR) of pre-surgical AMH values were 0.40 (0.55) ng/ml in the TLH group and 0.92 (1.23) ng/ml in the TAH group (P = 0.12) that decreased to 0.29 (0.44) ng/ml in the TLH group and 0.15 (0.31) ng/ml in the TAH group (P = 0.02). Also Median (IQR) of the difference between pre and post-surgical AMH values were 0.12 (0.31) and 0.58 (1.17) in TLH and TAH group, respectively (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION
The serum levels of AMH decreased significantly after both methods of hysterectomy (laparoscopy and laparotomy), while this decrease was greater in TAH group that shows.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34507569
doi: 10.1186/s12905-021-01472-5
pii: 10.1186/s12905-021-01472-5
pmc: PMC8434747
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Mullerian Hormone
80497-65-0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
329Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
JSLS. 2007 Jan-Mar;11(1):45-53
pubmed: 17651556
J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Aug;97 Suppl 8:S95-101
pubmed: 25518300
J Ultrasound Med. 2005 Feb;24(2):169-74
pubmed: 15661947
Fertil Steril. 1993 Dec;60(6):956-62
pubmed: 8243699
Climacteric. 2012 Aug;15(4):393-7
pubmed: 22268398
BJOG. 2006 Jul;113(7):804-9
pubmed: 16827764
Ann Epidemiol. 2008 Mar;18(3):253-60
pubmed: 18280923
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Dec;118(6):1271-1279
pubmed: 22067716
Fertil Steril. 2010 Jun;94(1):343-9
pubmed: 19345350
Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Mar;95(3):319-26
pubmed: 10711536
Menopause. 2004 Nov-Dec;11(6 Pt 1):601-6
pubmed: 15545787
Minerva Ginecol. 2001 Aug;53(4):229-34
pubmed: 11431638
BJOG. 2005 Jul;112(7):956-62
pubmed: 15957999
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 May-Jun;22(4):637-41
pubmed: 25653041
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16;(3):CD005638
pubmed: 18646133
Med Sci Monit. 2008 Jan;14(1):CR24-31
pubmed: 18160941
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Feb;24(2):247-257
pubmed: 28089684
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010 Jul;151(1):82-5
pubmed: 20211514
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 Apr;40:82-88
pubmed: 27784616
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2014 Sep-Oct;23(5):821-5
pubmed: 25491699
Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Feb;99(2):229-34
pubmed: 11814502
Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Nov;114(5):1156-1158
pubmed: 20168127
Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Aug;106(2):219-26
pubmed: 16055568
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 May;127(5):819-827
pubmed: 27054925
Hum Reprod Update. 2010 Mar-Apr;16(2):131-41
pubmed: 19793841
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017 Mar;210:54-57
pubmed: 27940394
Fertil Steril. 2010 Jun;94(1):71-7
pubmed: 19393996
Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Dec;116(6):1422-1431
pubmed: 21099613
J Reprod Med. 2003 Dec;48(12):943-9
pubmed: 14738021
BJOG. 2001 Apr;108(4):388-95
pubmed: 11305546
J Sex Med. 2014 Sep;11(9):2342-50
pubmed: 25042204
BMJ. 2004 Jan 17;328(7432):129
pubmed: 14711749