[Laparoscopy during pregnancy: experience of the French university hospital of Clermont-Ferrand]

Laparoscopy in Pregnancy: A Comparative Review of National Guidelines

Gynecological and general surgical conditions requiring surgical management during pregnancy constitute a medical challenge, which often entails the collaboration of numerous medical specialties. In recent years, laparoscopy in pregnancy has been accepted as a safe alternative to open surgery. This has led gynecological societies to conduct studies and issue guidelines related to laparoscopy in pregnancy, with a view to assisting and guiding clinicians and surgeons. The aim of this study was to review and compare the recommendations from various published national guidelines on laparoscopy in pregnant women. To that end, a descriptive review of guidelines from the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE), the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOCG), and the Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétriciens Français (CNGOF) was conducted. Regarding diagnosis, the SAGES and SOCG societies recommend ultrasound as the preferred and safe imaging technique during pregnancy. In terms of the optimal timing for laparoscopic intervention, BSGE and SAGES do not restrict the laparoscopic approach based on safety, depending on the gestation week, whereas SOCG and CNGOF propose early second trimester and first and second quarter of pregnancy respectively. There is an overall consensus regarding patient positioning, initial port placement, insufflation pressure during the operation, venous thromboembolic (VTE) prophylaxis, fetal heart monitoring, and tocolysis among the reviewed guidelines. Moreover, only the BSGE mentions the need for corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, and anti-D prophylactic administration.

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Pregnancy]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the place of imaging, tumour markers, type of treatment and surgical route, follow-up, delivery mode, and re-staging in case of BOT during pregnancy, in order to provide guidelines.

METHOD

A systematic bibliographical analysis on BOT during pregnancy was performed through a PUDMED search on articles published from 1990 to 2019 using keywords « borderline ovarian tumour and pregnancy ».

RESULTS

Pelvic ultrasound is the gold standard and first-line examination for the detection and characterization of adnexal masses during pregnancy (grade C). Pelvic MRI is recommended from 12 gestational weeks in case of indeterminate adnexal masses and should be concluded by a diagnostic score (grade C). Gadolinium injection should be minimized because of proven risk to the fetus and should be discussed on a case-by-case basis after patient information (grade C). In the absence of data in the literature, it is not possible to recommend the use of any tumour marker for the diagnosis of BOT during pregnancy. In case of a surgical treatment of BOT during pregnancy, there is insufficient evidence to recommend either a cystectomy or an oophorectomy. For BOT, the laparoscopic approach should be preferred during pregnancy if it is feasible (grade C). Surgical route and type of surgery should be chosen after taking into account the tumour size, the obstetrical term, and the subsequent desire for pregnancy, following discussion in a multidisciplinary meeting. In the absence of sufficient data in the literature, it is not possible to make any recommendation on the follow-up of a BOT suspected during pregnancy. There is not enough evidence in the literature to change obstetrical management for delivery in patients with BOT. In case of incomplete staging of a BOT treated during pregnancy, restaging can be discussed as for non-pregnant patients (grade C).

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis of BOT occurring during pregnancy remains rare despite systematic screening of adnexal masses in the first trimester of pregnancy and an increasing maternal age. There is limited data in the literature concerning the management of BOT during pregnancy. All decisions must be taken after discussion in a multidisciplinary meeting.

Investigation and Management of Adnexal Masses in Pregnancy

Adnexal masses can be found in 0.19 to 8.8% of all pregnancies. Most masses are functional and asymptomatic and up to 70% resolve spontaneously in the second trimester. The main predictors of persistence are the size (>5 cm) and the imagiological morphocomplexity. Those that persist carry a low risk of malignancy (0 to 10%). Most malignant masses are diagnosed at early stages and more than 50% are borderline epithelial neoplasms. Ultrasound is the preferred method to stratify the risk of complications and malignancy, allowing medical approach planning. Pregnancy and some gestational disorders may modify the levels of tumor markers, whereby their interpretation during pregnancy should be cautious. Large masses are at increased risk of torsion, rupture, and dystocia. When surgery is indicated, laparoscopy is a safe technique and should ideally be carried out in the second trimester of pregnancy.

Laparoscopic surgery for treating adnexal masses during the first trimester of pregnancy

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for treating adnexal masses during the first trimester of pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN:

An observational study of a prospective collection of data of all pregnant women who underwent laparoscopic surgery for adnexal masses during the first trimester of pregnancy between January 1999 and November 2012 at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of the Italian Hospital of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina was performed.

RESULTS:

A total of 13 women were included. The median (range) gestational age at the moment of surgical procedure was 7 weeks (range: 5-12 weeks). The main indication of surgery was cyst torsion in four cases (30.7%) and rupture of ovarian cysts in four cases (30.7%). Other indications included persistent ovarian cyst in three patients (23%) and heterotopic pregnancy in two cases (15.3%). Neither surgical complications nor spontaneous abortions occurred in any of the cases and the post-operative period was uneventful in all the cases. No cases of intrauterine growth retardation, preterm delivery, congenital defects, or neonatal complications were registered.

CONCLUSION:

The treatment of complicated adnexal masses by laparoscopic surgery during the first trimester of pregnancy appears to be a safe procedure both for the mother and for the foetus. Additional research on a larger number of cases is still needed to support these conclusions.

Volvulus of sigmoid colon during full term pregnancy with rectovaginal fistula: a case report

Intestinal obstruction due to sigmoid colon volvulus during pregnancy is a rare complication but associated with significant fetomaternal mortality. We describe a case of sigmoid volvulus in a patient with 37 wk pregnancy causing huge dilation of left colon. Patient developed rectovaginal fistula following nonmedical method to relieve distention by inserting stick as told by patient.

Volvulus of the Sigmoid Colon during Pregnancy: A Case Report

Colonic obstruction due to sigmoid colon volvulus during pregnancy is a rare but complication with significant maternal and fetal mortality. We describe a case of sigmoid volvulus in a patient with 33 weeks of gestation that developed complete necrosis of the left colon. Case. 27-year-old woman was admitted with 3 days of abdominal distention, vomit, and the stoppage of the passage of gases and feces. She was admitted with poor clinical conditions with septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and signs of diffuse peritonitis. Abdominal radiography showed severe dilation of the colon with horseshoe signal suggesting a sigmoid volvulus, pneumoperitoneum and we could not we could not identify fetal heartbeats. With a diagnosis of complicate sigmoid volvulus she was underwent to the laparotomy where we found necrosis of all descending colon due to double twist volvulus of the sigmoid. We performed a colectomy with a confection of a proximal colostomy, and closing of the rectal stump. Due to an uncontrollable uterine bleeding during cesarean due, it was required a hysterectomy. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course thereafter and was discharged on a regular diet on the 15th postoperative day.

Risks associated with laparoscopic entry: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians

The aim of these recommendations of the French National College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians was to focus the surgeon's attention on those aspects which could allow him/her to prevent, or at least limit, the incidence of these serious complications, in the absence of a previous laparotomy or specific risk factors (obesity, gauntness, large pelvic mass or pregnancy), four widely evaluated techniques can be used in a first line approach (Grade B): blind trans-umbilical technique following creation of pneumoperitoneum with a needle, open laparoscopy (Hasson technique), left upper quadrant entry (pneumoperitoneum and insertion of the first trocar) and direct trans-umbilical trocar with no prior pneumoperitoneum. The currently existing trials do not allow one or another of these techniques to be preferred. Radially expanding insertion systems and optical trocars cannot be recommended as a first-line approach, as a consequence of their currently insufficient degree of evaluation (Grade C). Trans-umbilical (blind or open) laparoscopic entry in a slim woman must be associated with care, as a result of the proximity of the large vessels (Grade B). If a blind trans-umbilical insertion technique is decided upon, one option can be to insufflate into the left upper quadrant (professional consensus). In the case of a previous midline laparotomy, whatever the technique used, initial entry is recommended at a distance from the scars (Grade B). It is recommended to carry out micro-laparoscopy in the LUQ, because this is the most completely evaluated technique for this indication (Grade C). One option is to use open laparoscopy at a distance from the existing scars (professional consensus). During pregnancy, the insertion position of the first laparoscopic trocar will need to be adapted according to the volume of the uterus (Grade B). Starting from 14WG, trans-umbilical Veress needle insufflation is contraindicated (Grade C). Two trocar insertion techniques are thus recommended: open laparoscopy (using the trans-umbilical or supra-umbilical routes, depending on the volume of the uterus) or micro-laparoscopy via the left upper quadrant (Grade C). After the second quarter of pregnancy, with laparoscopy the patient will need to be placed on a table inclined towards her left side, in order to minimize compression of the inferior vena cava (Grade B). In the case of laparoscopy during pregnancy, the insufflation pressure must be maintained at a maximum of 12mmHg (Grade B). After 24WG, if laparoscopy is performed, it is recommended to apply open laparoscopy, above the level of the umbilicus (professional consensus). Patients must be informed of the risks inherent to the insertion of trocars during laparoscopy (vascular, bowel or bladder injury) (Grade B). The more benign the pathology requiring an operation, the more detailed the supplied information must be, including that concerning rare but serious complications (Grade B).