When you see nothing at all: Outcomes following a negative laparoscopy. A systematic review

Author:

Steele Lucy A.1ORCID,Mooney Samantha S.23ORCID,Gilbee Ebony S.2ORCID,Grover Sonia R.23ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Medicine Austin Hospital Clinical School Victoria Melbourne Australia

2. Department of Endosurgery Mercy Hospital for Women Victoria Melbourne Australia

3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology The University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia

Abstract

BackgroundPersistent pelvic pain (PPP) is a complex and often debilitating condition. While widely accepted to be multifactorial in nature, the precise aetiology of PPP remains elusive. In many cases, women who undergo laparoscopy for PPP will have no visible pathology identified (a ‘negative’ laparoscopy). Currently, there are no consensus guidelines which outline the recommended management following a negative laparoscopy, and the woman's experiences and outcomes are not widely known.AimsThis review aims to identify and summarise the literature surrounding the experiences of women with PPP who have a negative laparoscopy; specifically, their outcomes of pain, quality of life (QoL), satisfaction with care, and their overall management.Materials and MethodsA systematic search of the electronic databases Ovid Medline, PubMed and Embase was performed. Studies in English exploring the outcomes of women with PPP following a negative laparoscopy were included.ResultsFour studies consisting of a total of 200 women were included. Results were inconsistent. Three studies concluded that the majority of women with PPP had persistent pain following a negative laparoscopy. A single study found that pain significantly improved after negative laparoscopy. QoL outcomes varied, with two studies reporting a positive impact and two studies reporting a deleterious impact on QoL following a negative laparoscopy.ConclusionsThe impact on pain outcomes and QoL following a laparoscopy that does not diagnose pathology remains unknown, and the available evidence is insufficient to guide evidence‐based practice. This review highlights a significant gap in our understanding of surgical management for PPP.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,General Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Editor‐in‐chief's introduction to ANZJOG 64(2);Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology;2024-04

2. Pain with and without a lesion;The History of Gynecological Treatment of Women’s Pelvic Pain and the Recent Emergence of Pain Sensitization;2024

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3