Impact of unilateral versus bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling on ovarian reserve and pregnancy rate: a randomized clinical trial

Ovarian Reserve and Hormone Alteration Following Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling for Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome: A Systematic Review

We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the data in the literature on ovarian reserve and ovarian hormone following laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD). The PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest databases were comprehensively searched using a combination of keywords such as "ovarian reserve", "laparoscopic ovarian drilling", "luteinizing hormone", "follicle-stimulating hormone", "inhibin", "LH/FSH ratio", "ovulation", and "testosterone". All studies involving females of reproductive age who were officially diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) and had undergone LOD with reported data concerning at least one of the following parameters were considered for inclusion: ovarian reserve, anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), inhibin, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), LH/FSH ratio, and testosterone. All the included studies were evaluated by the GRADE scale for bias and their findings were synthesized by four independent coauthors. A total of 38 studies involving 3118 female patients were included. Based on our findings, a significant number of participants experienced spontaneous ovulation along with a significant decrease in ovarian reserve, and a significant decrease in AMH, LH, and testosterone, with no significant changes in FSH and inhibin B. With the end goal of LOD being to improve fertility and pregnancy rates among females with PCOS, it is important to look at the first few steps that enable this. As expected, there was a significant improvement in ovulation while the ovarian reserve decreased. Along with the decrease in ovarian reserve, there was a significant normalization in AMH, LH, and testosterone levels. LOD may exert its main effects through the manipulation of the ovarian reserves.

Ovarian Drilling: Back to the Future

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the leading cause of anovulatory infertility. The complex metabolic dysregulation at the base of this syndrome often renders infertility management challenging. Many pharmacological strategies have been applied for the induction of ovulation with a non-negligible rate of severe complications such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and multiple pregnancies. Ovarian drilling (OD) is currently being adopted as a second-line treatment, to be performed in case of medical therapy. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), the contemporary version of ovarian wedge resection, is considered effective for gonadotropins in terms of live birth rates, but without the risks of iatrogenic complications in gonadotropin therapy. Its endocrinal effects are longer lasting and, after the accomplishment of this procedure, ovarian responsiveness to successive ovulation induction agents is enhanced. Traditional LOD, however, is burdened by the potential risks of iatrogenic adhesions and decreased ovarian reserve and, therefore, should only be considered in selected cases. To overcome these limits, novel tailored and mini-invasive approaches, which are still waiting for wide acceptance, have been introduced, although their role is still not well-clarified and none of them have provided enough evidence in terms of efficacy and safety.

Metformin With or Without Clomiphene Citrate Versus Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling With or Without Clomiphene Citrate to Treat Patients With Clomiphene Citrate-Resistant Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Which is optimal to treat clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (CCR-PCOS) with LOD or metformin remains a problem. There are three inconsistent or even contradictory views.

Objectives: The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Metformin with or without CC and to compare them with LOD with or without CC (Met/Met-CC vs. LOD/LOD-CC) in women with CCR-PCOS who also have anovulation.

Data source: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched to identify relevant studies reported between 1 Jan 1966 and 31 Aug 2019; the search was updated on 17 May 2022.

Study eligibility criteria: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CCR-PCOS that had considered Met/Met-CC and LOD/LOD-CC as the exposure variables and fertility as the main outcome variable.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods: We assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary effectiveness outcome was live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate and the primary safety outcome was miscarriage rate. A fixed-effect meta-analysis was performed. The robustness of the results was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to examine the reasons for heterogeneity. Publication bias was examined using the funnel plot, Egger linear regression, and Begg rank correlation tests. The quality of this meta-analysis was estimated according to the GRADE approach. This meta-analysis has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021240156).

Results: Among 71 potentially relevant studies, we included five RCTs in our meta-analysis. We found no difference in effectiveness between Met-CC and LOD in terms of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87–1.21, z = 0.28; p = 0.780), and miscarriage rates (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.46–1.36, z = 0.86; p = 0.390). I2 tests results revealed moderate or no heterogeneity (I2 = 51.4%, p = 0.083; I2= 0.0%; p = 0.952). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. Funnel plot, Egger linear regression, and Begg rank correlation tests implied no publication bias (p > 0.05). LOD was more expensive than Met (€1050 vs. €50.16). The evidence quality was moderate.

Conclusion: There is no evidence on the difference in the outcomes between the two interventions regarding ovulation, pregnancy, and live birth. As LOD is an invasive procedure and carries inherent risks, the use of Met/Met-CC should be the second-line treatment for women with CCR-PCOS.

Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42021240156.

Comparison of the effects of bilateral and unilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling on pregnancy rates in infertile patients with polycystic ovary syndrome

AIM

This study aims to investigate the effects of unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) on pregnancy rates in patients with clomiphene citrate (CC) resistant infertile polycystic ovary syndrome.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 75 patients who were admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Antalya Training and Research Hospital between July 2016 and December 2017 and underwent LOD operation. Among these patients, 37 underwent unilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (ULOD) and 38 underwent bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (BLOD). The drilling procedure was carried out using the following equation: Number of punctures (np) = 60 J/cm³ /30 watt × 4 s by selecting the larger ovary in the patients who underwent ULOD and by taking the ovarian volume of each ovary in the BLOD group.

RESULTS

During the 1-year follow-up, 20 of the ULOD patients (54.1%) and 13 of the BLOD patients (34.2%) were observed to be pregnant. Although a higher number of pregnancies were obtained in the ULOD group, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups (P = 0.083). The pregnancies occurred more in the first 6 months during the postoperative follow-ups of the patients. A total of 14 (70%) of the 20 pregnancies in the ULOD group and 9 (69.2%) of the 13 pregnancies in the BLOD group occurred in the first 6 months.

CONCLUSION

ULOD with respect to a larger ovarian volume should be preferred to BLOD for CC-resistant PCOS patients because of the high pregnancy rates and fewer potential side effects.

Molecular Mechanisms of Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling and Its Therapeutic Effects in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrinopathy, characterized by chronic anovulation, hyperandrogenism, and multiple small subcapsular cystic follicles in the ovary during ultrasonography, and affects 5–10% of women of reproductive age. PCOS is frequently associated with insulin resistance (IR) accompanied by compensatory hyperinsulinemia and, therefore, presents an increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). The pathophysiology of PCOS is unclear, and many hypotheses have been proposed. Among these hypotheses, IR and hyperandrogenism may be the two key factors. The first line of treatment in PCOS includes lifestyle changes and body weight reduction. Achieving a 5–15% body weight reduction may improve IR and PCOS-associated hormonal abnormalities. For women who desire pregnancy, clomiphene citrate (CC) is the front-line treatment for ovulation induction. Twenty five percent of women may fail to ovulate spontaneously after three cycles of CC treatment, which is called CC-resistant PCOS. For CC-resistant PCOS women, there are many strategies to improve ovulation rate, including medical treatment and surgical approaches. Among the various surgical approaches, one particular surgical method, called laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), has been proposed as an alternative treatment. LOD results in an overall spontaneous ovulation rate of 30–90% and final pregnancy rates of 13–88%. These benefits are more significant for women with CC-resistant PCOS. Although the intra- and post-operative complications and sequelae are always important, we believe that a better understanding of the pathophysiological changes and/or molecular mechanisms after LOD may provide a rationale for this procedure. LOD, mediated mainly by thermal effects, produces a series of morphological and biochemical changes. These changes include the formation of artificial holes in the very thick cortical wall, loosening of the dense and hard cortical wall, destruction of ovarian follicles with a subsequently decreased amount of theca and/or granulosa cells, destruction of ovarian stromal tissue with the subsequent development of transient but purulent and acute inflammatory reactions to initiate the immune response, and the continuing leakage or drainage of “toxic” follicular fluid in these immature and growth-ceased pre-antral follicles. All these factors contribute to decreasing local and systemic androgen levels, the following apoptosis process with these pre-antral follicles to atresia; the re-starting of normal follicular recruitment, development, and maturation, and finally, the normalization of the “hypothalamus–pituitary–ovary” axis and subsequent spontaneous ovulation. The detailed local and systematic changes in PCOS women after LOD are comprehensively reviewed in the current article.

Variation of Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling for Clomiphene Citrate-resistant Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Infertility: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate novel surgical variations of laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) and compare with standard bilateral LOD.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases were searched, including Cochrane database, CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Virtual Health Library, OpenSIGLE, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, and The Chinese Clinical Trial Register in February 2019.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating LOD for patients with clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome and infertility and reporting reproductive outcomes, surgical complications, serum indexes, menses resumption, and ultrasound results were included. Quality and risk of bias were evaluated by 2 authors, respectively.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

A total of 20 RCTs with 1615 patients were included. Evaluation of the quality of evidence for each study was based on each study's limitations of 5 outcome domains described by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation and found to be moderate to very low. Live births were only reported by 4 studies. Unilateral LOD did not differ with bilateral LOD in reproductive outcomes, such as pregnancy (p = .11, I² = 75%), ovulation (p = .08, I² = 0%), miscarriage (p = .61), and menstruation resumption (p = .06). There was insufficient evidence regarding efficacy and safety of novel methods of LOD, such as transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy (1 RCT) and micro-LOD (3 RCTs). Evidence regarding the suitable number of ovarian punctures, duration of drilling, and antimüllerian hormone or antral follicle numbers following LOD were inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral LOD seems to be suitable replacement for conventional bilateral LOD for clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome, although more studies involving long-term reproductive efficacy, adverse events, and varying forms of LOD are warranted.

Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common condition affecting 8% to 13% of reproductive-aged women. In the past clomiphene citrate (CC) used to be the first-line treatment in women with PCOS. Ovulation induction with letrozole should be the first-line treatment according to new guidelines, but the use of letrozole is off-label. Consequently, CC is still commonly used. Approximately 20% of women on CC do not ovulate. Women who are CC-resistant can be treated with gonadotrophins or other medical ovulation-induction agents. These medications are not always successful, can be time-consuming and can cause adverse events like multiple pregnancies and cycle cancellation due to an excessive response. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) is a surgical alternative to medical treatment. There are risks associated with surgery, such as complications from anaesthesia, infection, and adhesions.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of LOD with or without medical ovulation induction compared with medical ovulation induction alone for women with anovulatory polycystic PCOS and CC-resistance.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trials registers up to 8 October 2019, together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with anovulatory PCOS and CC resistance who underwent LOD with or without medical ovulation induction versus medical ovulation induction alone, LOD with assisted reproductive technologies (ART) versus ART, LOD with second-look laparoscopy versus expectant management, or different techniques of LOD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, extracted data and evaluated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE method. The primary effectiveness outcome was live birth and the primary safety outcome was multiple pregnancy. Pregnancy, miscarriage, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), ovulation, costs, and quality of life were secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes 38 trials (3326 women). The evidence was very low- to moderate-quality; the main limitations were due to poor reporting of study methods, with downgrading for risks of bias (randomisation and allocation concealment) and lack of blinding. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling with or without medical ovulation induction versus medical ovulation induction alone Pooled results suggest LOD may decrease live birth slightly when compared with medical ovulation induction alone (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 0.92; 9 studies, 1015 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). The evidence suggest that if the chance of live birth following medical ovulation induction alone is 42%, the chance following LOD would be between 28% and 40%. The sensitivity analysis restricted to only RCTs with low risk of selection bias suggested there is uncertainty whether there is a difference between the treatments (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.36; 4 studies, 415 women; I² = 0%, low-quality evidence). LOD probably reduces multiple pregnancy rates (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.66; 14 studies, 1161 women; I² = 2%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if we assume the risk of multiple pregnancy following medical ovulation induction is 5.0%, the risk following LOD would be between 0.9% and 3.4%. Restricting to RCTs that followed women for six months after LOD and six cycles of ovulation induction only, the results for live birth were consistent with the main analysis. There may be little or no difference between the treatments for the likelihood of a clinical pregnancy (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.03; 21 studies, 2016 women; I² = 19%; low-quality evidence). There is uncertainty about the effect of LOD compared with ovulation induction alone on miscarriage (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.59; 19 studies, 1909 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). OHSS was a very rare event. LOD may reduce OHSS (Peto OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.91; 8 studies, 722 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Unilateral LOD versus bilateral LOD Due to the small sample size, the quality of evidence is insufficient to justify a conclusion on live birth (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.78; 1 study, 44 women; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available on multiple pregnancy. The likelihood of a clinical pregnancy is uncertain between the treatments, due to the quality of the evidence and the large heterogeneity between the studies (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84; 7 studies, 470 women; I² = 60%, very low-quality evidence). Due to the small sample size, the quality of evidence is not sufficient to justify a conclusion on miscarriage (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.33; 2 studies, 131 women; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Other comparisons Due to lack of evidence and very low-quality data there is uncertainty whether there is a difference for any of the following comparisons: LOD with IVF versus IVF, LOD with second-look laparoscopy versus expectant management, monopolar versus bipolar LOD, and adjusted thermal dose versus fixed thermal dose.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic ovarian drilling with and without medical ovulation induction may decrease the live birth rate in women with anovulatory PCOS and CC resistance compared with medical ovulation induction alone. But the sensitivity analysis restricted to only RCTs at low risk of selection bias suggests there is uncertainty whether there is a difference between the treatments, due to uncertainty around the estimate. Moderate-quality evidence shows that LOD probably reduces the number of multiple pregnancy. Low-quality evidence suggests that there may be little or no difference between the treatments for the likelihood of a clinical pregnancy, and there is uncertainty about the effect of LOD compared with ovulation induction alone on miscarriage. LOD may result in less OHSS. The quality of evidence is insufficient to justify a conclusion on live birth, clinical pregnancy or miscarriage rate for the analysis of unilateral LOD versus bilateral LOD. There were no data available on multiple pregnancy.

The impact of repetitive oocyte retrieval on the ovarian reserve: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To investigate a possible influence of repetitive micro-traumata on the ovaries in the course of oocyte retrieval during IVF/ICSI treatment on serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels.

METHODS

The study included retrospectively collected data from women who underwent three or more consecutive IVF/ICSI treatments between 2007 and 2017. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate changes in serum AMH levels on cycle days 1-3 during the course of repetitive IVF/ICSI treatments.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were included in this study. Median AMH levels before the first, second and third IVF/ICSI cycles were 3.8 ng/mL (IQR 1.8-7.1), 3.3 ng/mL (IQR 1.8-6.1) and 3.0 ng/mL (IQR 1.6-5.3), respectively (p = n.s.). In patients who underwent IVF/ICSI due to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), we found a significant decrease in AMH serum levels between the first [AMH 9.7 ng/mL (IQR 7.4-14.4)] and the third [AMH 5.3 ng/mL (IQR 3.3-10.4)] IVF/ICSI cycles (p = 0.026). When performing a generalized linear model, we found PCOS to be an independent predictor for serum AMH decrease during the course of three oocyte retrievals (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

When comparing the indications for IVF/ICSI, we observed a significant decrease in AMH serum levels after repetitive oocyte retrievals only in women with PCOS, while the decrease in AMH was not significant in patients with tubal factor, endometriosis, male factor and unexplained infertility. This finding leads us to hypothesize that repetitive micro-traumata on the ovarian cortex might diminish/normalize functional ovarian reserve in women with PCOS. Further prospective studies are highly warranted to allow firm conclusions.

Changes in ovarian reserve and ovarian blood flow in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome following laparoscopic ovarian drilling

This prospective cohort study was conducted on 80 patients with clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD). Pre- and post-LOD ovarian reserve parameters (anti-Mullerian hormone: AMH, ovarian volume: OV, and antral follicle count: AFC) and ovarian stromal blood flow indices (Vascularization index: VI, flow index: FI, and vascularization flow index: VFI) were measured to explore the effect of LOD and to find out the correlation between serum AMH and different clinical, hormonal, and ultrasonic variables. There was a highly significant reduction of the serum AMH (p < .001) after LOD with significant reduction in OV, AFC and vascular indices (VI, FI and VFI) of the right and left ovaries (p < .05). LOD significantly reduced ovarian reserve parameters (AMH, OV and AFC) and ovarian stromal blood flow indices (VI, FI and VFI) with no observed correlation between AMH levels and Doppler indices.

Unilateral or bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling in polycystic ovary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of unilateral vs. bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (ULOD vs. BLOD) for improving fertility outcomes in infertile women with clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) as well as its effect on ovarian reserve.

METHODS

Searches were conducted on PubMed, ScienceDirect, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL databases from January 1984 to January 2017. Only randomized trials comparing ULOD with BLOD were included. The PRISMA Statement was followed. Main outcomes were ovulation and clinical pregnancy rates per woman randomized. Secondary outcomes were; live birth and miscarriage rates as well as postoperative serum anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) concentration and antral follicle count (AFC). Quality assessment was performed by the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

Eight eligible trials (484 women) were analyzed. No significant difference was found in rates of ovulation (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.47-1.11), clinical pregnancy (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.22-1.41), live birth (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.28-2.10), or miscarriage (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.33-2.84) when ULOD was compared with BLOD. The reduction in AMH was comparable between the two procedures (MD 0.64 ng/ml; 95% CI - 0.08 to 1.36). A significantly higher AFC at 6-month follow-up was found with dose-adjusted ULOD (MD 2.20; 95% CI 1.01-3.39).

CONCLUSIONS

After carefully weighing up the well-known benefits of BLOD against a potential risk to ovarian reserve, clinicians could be advised to offer the fixed-dose ULOD to their infertile patients with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. This is concordant with the "primum non nocere" principal if LOD will be envisaged.

Ovarian surgery for symptom relief in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrine condition, affecting approximately one in 10 women. PCOS is defined by two of three features: oligo- or anovulation, clinical or biochemical hyperandrogenism or both, or polycystic ovaries.Women with PCOS can have a wide range of health problems, including infrequent and irregular periods, unwanted hair growth and acne, and subnormal fertility. Long-term health concerns include an increased risk of heart disease, diabetes and the development of precancerous disease of the womb.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and harms of ovarian surgery as a treatment for symptomatic relief of hirsutism, acne and menstrual irregularity in PCOS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group specialized register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (from inception to 17 October 2016). We handsearched citation lists, registers of ongoing trials and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of women undergoing ovarian drilling in comparison to no treatment, medical treatment, or other forms of surgical treatment for the symptoms of PCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary outcome measures were improvement in menstrual regularity and androgenic symptoms of PCOS (hirsutism, acne); the secondary outcome measures included harms, change of body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, androgen levels, metabolic measures and quality of life. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs (2278 women analyzed) of participants with PCOS and symptoms of acne, hirsutism or irregular menstrual cycles, all of which included laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) as an intervention.Two studies reported their funding source (Farquhar 2002 - supported in part by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation; Sarouri 2015 - the authors thank the Vice Chancellor for Research of Guilan University of Medical Sciences for funding this project).The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate quality. The main limitations were imprecision associated with the low number of studies, inconsistency and risk of bias associated with the inability to blind participants. There were too few studies to assess risk of publication bias. Menstrual RegularityTwo studies compared LOD versus metformin (n=226) but no conclusions could be drawn with regard to menstrual regularity, as their findings were inconsistent and they were unsuitable for pooling. There appeared to be little or no difference in the rate of women reporting improvement in menstrual regularity when LOD was compared with medical treatment including metformin + clomiphene (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.64, 2 studies, 332 women, I² = 13%, low-quality evidence), letrozole (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.84, 1 study, 260 women, low-quality evidence), or metformin + letrozole (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.81, 1 study, 146 women, low-quality evidence). However, one study reported that LOD was superior to gonadotrophin (OR 19.2, 95% CI 3.17 to 116.45, 1 study, 35 women, very low-quality evidence).There appeared to be little or no difference in the rate of women reporting improvement in menstrual regularity when bilateral unipolar LOD was compared to unilateral LOD (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.62 to 3.71, 2 studies, 104 women, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence), transvaginal ultrasound-guided LOD (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.37, 1 study, 147 women, low-quality evidence), LOD using adjusted thermal dose in accordance with the ovarian volume (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.14, 1 study, 115 women, low-quality evidence) or bipolar LOD (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.05 to 18.57, 1 study, 18 women, low-quality evidence).Four to five punctures per ovary may improve the rate of women reporting menstrual regularity compared with two or fewer (OR 16.04, 95% CI 4.19 to 61.34, 2 studies, 73 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence). Androgenic SymptomsThere was probably little or no difference in improvement in androgenic symptoms when LOD was compared to metformin (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.37, 1 study, 126 women, moderate-quality evidence) or gonadotrophins; acne (OR 3.20, 95% CI 0.33 to 30.94, 1 study, 25 women, low-quality evidence), hirsutism (OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.22 to 23.89, 1 study, 25 women, low-quality evidence).There appeared to be little or no difference in improvement of androgenic symptoms when LOD was compared to transvaginal ultrasound-guided LOD, with respect to hirsutism (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.91, 1 study, 39 women, low-quality evidence) or acne (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.50, 1 study, 31 women, low-quality evidence). HarmsLOD was associated with fewer gastrointestinal side effects than metformin plus clomiphene (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.36, 2 studies, 332 women, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). One study suggested little or no difference in rates of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome between LOD and gonadotrophins (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.61, 1 study, 33 women, low-quality evidence).There were fewer adhesions with transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy compared to LOD (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, 1 study, 246 women, moderate-quality evidence). There appeared to be little or no difference in adhesions when variable energy LOD was compared with standard LOD (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.88, 1 study, 64 women, low-quality evidence). Another study (44 women) reported that none of the women who returned for surgery following either traditional or unilateral LOD were found to have adhesions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no clear evidence that LOD improves menstrual regularity or the androgenic symptoms of PCOS, compared to most of the medical treatments used in the included studies. LOD was associated with fewer gastrointestinal side effects compared to metformin and clomiphene.There was also no clear evidence of different effectiveness between types of LOD, except that LOD with four to five punctures per ovary may be more effective than two or fewer punctures. There was little evidence comparing LOD with different types of surgery, although one study concluded that transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy had a lower risk of adhesions than LOD.There was evidence from one small study of benefit from LOD compared to gonadotrophins for menstrual regulation. However, gonadotrophins are seldom used for this indication.

Unilateral Versus Bilateral Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling Using Thermal Dose Adjusted According to Ovarian Volume in CC-Resistant PCOS, A Randomized Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of unilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling versus bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling with thermal dose adjusted according to ovarian volume in clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant PCOS patients in terms of endocrine changes, menstrual cycle resumption, ovulation and pregnancy rates.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zagazig university hospitals. One hundred CC-resistant PCOS patients were divided into two groups. Group (I) (50 patients) underwent unilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling with thermal dose adjusted according to ovarian volume (60 J/cm3 of ovarian tissue), and group (II) (50 patients) underwent bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling using the same previously mentioned thermal dose. Endocrinal changes and menstrual cycle resumption were assessed within 8 weeks postoperatively, but the ovulation and pregnancy rates were estimated after 6-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards demographic data (p > 0.05). As regards menstruation cycle resumption (62.5 vs. 81%) (p = 0.047), total ovulation rate (54.2 vs. 78.7%) (p = 0.011) and cumulative pregnancy rate (33.3 vs. 55.3%) (p = 0.031), there was statistically significant difference between both groups. After drilling, there were highly statistically significant decrease in the mean serum levels of luteinizing hormone (LH) and significant decrease in the mean serum levels of testosterone in both groups. Mean serum level of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) did not change significantly in both groups after drilling.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling with thermal dose adjusted according to ovarian volume is more effective than the right-sided unilateral technique with thermal dose adjusted according to ovarian volume in terms of menstrual cycle resumption, ovulation and cumulative pregnancy rates in CC-resistant PCOS patients.

Comparative effectiveness of 9 ovulation-induction therapies in patients with clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome: a network meta-analysis

The comparative efficacies of ovulation-induction treatments in patients with clomiphene citrate-resistant (CCR) polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) are not well known. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis to rank the reproductive efficacies of these treatments. We ultimately included 26 randomized clinical trials with 2722 participants and 9 types of therapies: clomiphene citrate (CC), metformin, letrozole, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG), unilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (ULOD), bilateral laparoscopic ovarian drilling (BLOD), the combination of metformin with letrozole (metformin+letrozole), and the combination of metformin with CC (metformin+CC). The network meta-analysis demonstrates that hMG therapy result in higher pregnancy rates than BLOD, ULOD and CC therapies. Pregnancy, live birth and ovulation rates are significantly higher in metformin+letrozole and FSH groups than CC group. The abortion rate in the metformin+letrozole group is significantly lower than that in the metformin+CC group. Ranking probabilities show that, apart from gonadotropin (FSH and hMG), metformin+letrozole is also potentially more effective in improving reproductive outcomes than other therapies. In conclusion, owing to the low quality of evidence and the wide confidence intervals, no recommendation could be made for the treatment of ovulation-induction in patients with CCR PCOS.

The impact of laparoscopic ovarian drilling on AMH and ovarian reserve: a meta-analysis

Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) has been widely used as an effective treatment of anovulatory women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). However, there has been a growing concern over a possible damaging effect of this procedure on ovarian reserve. The objective of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that LOD compromises ovarian reserve as measured by post-operative changes in circulating anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). This meta-analysis included all cohort studies as well as randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating serum AMH concentrations and other ovarian reserve markers in women with PCOS undergoing LOD. Various databases were searched including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Dynamed Plus, ScienceDirect, TRIP database, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to December 2016. Sixty studies were identified, of which seven were deemed eligible for this review. AMH data were extracted from each study and entered into the RevMan software to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) between pre- and post-operative values. Pooled analysis of all studies (n = 442) revealed a statistically significant decline in serum AMH concentration after LOD (WMD -2.13 ng/mL; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.97 to -1.30). Subgroup analysis based on duration of follow-up, AMH kit, laterality of surgery and amount of energy applied during LOD consistently showed a statistically significant fall in serum AMH concentration. In conclusion, although LOD seems to markedly reduce circulating AMH, it remains uncertain whether this reflects a real damage to ovarian reserve or normalisation of the high pre-operative serum AMH levels. Further long-term studies on ovarian reserve after LOD are required to address this uncertainty.