Show simple item record

 
dc.contributorInstitut d'Assistència Sanitària
dc.contributor.authorGarcia-Tejedor, Amparo
dc.contributor.authorGuevara Peralta , Rodrigo
dc.contributor.authorMartinez-Garcia, Jose Manuel
dc.contributor.authorCorbalán, Shiana
dc.contributor.authorAgüero, Mauricio
dc.contributor.authorGómez-Romero, María
dc.contributor.authorCararach, Marta
dc.contributor.authorCastellarnau, Marta
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez, Mariví
dc.contributor.authorLou Mercadé, Ana Cristina
dc.contributor.authorCosta, Laura
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez, Maria José
dc.contributor.authorHuguet, Eva
dc.contributor.authorCarreras, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorCastel Seguí, Ana Belén
dc.contributor.authorFont-Roig, Maria
dc.contributor.authorSarasa, Núria
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-25T12:00:43Z
dc.date.available2025-11-25T12:00:43Z
dc.date.issued2025-11-04
dc.identifier.citationGarcía-Tejedor A, Guevara-Peralta R, Martinez-Garcia JM, Corbalán S, Agüero M, Gomez-Romero M, et al. Ultrasound-guided ethanol sclerotherapy versus laparoscopic surgery for endometriomas: a randomized clinical trial in a real-world setting. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2025 Nov 4.
dc.identifier.issn1432-0711
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11351/14101
dc.descriptionCystectomy; Endometrioma; Ultrasound-guided aspiration
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided alcohol sclerotherapy versus laparoscopic cystectomy for the management of ovarian endometriomas, focusing on complications, recurrence, pain relief, and healthcare costs. Methods: We conducted a multicentre, randomized clinical trial across 20 centers in Spain. A total of 167 women aged 18-40 years with ovarian endometriomas (35-100 mm) were recruited between June 2018 and June 2022. Participants were randomized to receive either ultrasound-guided aspiration with ethanol sclerotherapy or standard laparoscopic cystectomy. Complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) before and six months after treatment. Recurrence was defined as the reappearance of a cystic lesion at the treated site and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. The primary analysis followed an intention-to-treat approach and included 158 patients (sclerotherapy: n = 84; cystectomy: n = 74). The per-protocol analysis included 92 patients (sclerotherapy: n = 57; cystectomy: n = 37). Direct hospital costs, complication rates, recurrence, and pain relief were compared between groups. Results: Intention-to-treat analyses show that complications were low in both groups (12%), most of which were Grade I-II, although 4.1% were Grade III in the surgery group. The cost of sclerotherapy was significantly lower (€472 vs. €2128, p < 0.001). In per-protocol analyses, the cyst recurrence or reappearance was similar between the two groups, with rates of 25.7% (9 of 35) in the surgery group and 22.8% (13 of 57) in the sclerotherapy group (p = 0.16). Pain was improved or completely resolved in 49 of 55 cases (89.1%) in the sclerotherapy group and in 21 of 32 cases (65.7%) in the laparoscopic surgery group (p = 0.05). Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided alcohol sclerotherapy is a safe, cost-effective alternative to laparoscopic cystectomy for the treatment of endometriomas, with comparable recurrence rates and pain relief.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSpringer Nature
dc.relation.ispartofseriesArchives of Gynecology and Obstetrics;
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceScientia
dc.subjectEndometriosi
dc.subjectCirurgia laparoscòpica
dc.subjectEcografia
dc.subject.meshEndometriosis
dc.subject.meshLaparoscopy
dc.subject.meshUltrasonography
dc.titleUltrasound-guided ethanol sclerotherapy versus laparoscopic surgery for endometriomas: a randomized clinical trial in a real-world setting
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00404-025-08205-1
dc.subject.decsendometriosis
dc.subject.decslaparoscopia
dc.subject.decsecografía obstétrica
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-025-08205-1
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.audienceProfessionals
dc.event.productorBiblioteca
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[García-Tejedor A, Martinez-Garcia JM] Departament de Ginecologia, Facultat de Medicina, Hospital Universitari Bellvitge, Universitat de Barcelona, l’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL) l’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. [Guevara-Peralta R] Departament de Ginecologia, Facultat de Medicina, Hospital Universitari Bellvitge, l’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. Facultat de Medicina, Departament de Ciències Clíniques, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. [Corbalán S] Departament de Ginecologia, Hospital Los Arcos, Murcia, Spain. [Agüero M] Departament de Ginecologia, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. [Gomez-Romero M] Departament de Ginecologia, Hospital Joan XXIII, Tarragona, Spain. [Font-Roig M] Departament de Ginecologia, Hospital Santa Caterina, Institut d’Assistència Sanitària (IAS), Girona, Spain. [Sarasa N] Departament de Ginecologia, Hospital General de Granollers, Granollers, Spain
dc.identifier.pmid41186685
dc.relation.projectidinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/PI16/00801
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record