A Comparative Multicentric Study on Serosal and Endometrial Myomectomy During Cesarean Section: Surgical Outcomes

Hatirnaz S., Guler O., BAŞBUĞ A., Cetinkaya M. B., Kanat-Pektas M., Bakay K., ...More

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE SURGERY, vol.34, no.7, pp.687-694, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 34 Issue: 7
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1080/08941939.2020.1725188
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, EBSCO Legal Collection, EBSCO Legal Source, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Page Numbers: pp.687-694
  • Keywords: Endometrial myomectomy, serosal myomectomy, cesarean section, fibroids, leiomyoma, pregnancy, UTERINE ARTERY LIGATION, PREGNANT-WOMEN, RISK-FACTORS, BLOOD-LOSS, COMPLICATIONS, LEIOMYOMAS, MYOMAS, IMPACT
  • Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Affiliated: Yes


Objective: This multi-center study aims to determine the efficiency and safety of endometrial myomectomy (EM) for the removal of uterine fibroids during cesarean section (CS). Methods: Retrospective review of 360 women diagnosed for fibroids during pregnancy. They all delivered by CS between 2014 and 2019. The study groups included 118 women who only underwent EM, 120 women who only had subserosal myomectomy by traditional technique and 122 women with fibroids who decided to avoid cesarean myomectomy, as control group. They were analyzed and compared the surgical outcomes. Results: The EM, subserosal myomectomy and control groups were statistically (p > 0.05) similar for to age, body mass index (BMI), gravidity, parity, gestational age at delivery, indications for CS, number of excised fibroids, size of the largest myoma. Postoperative hemoglobin values and ? (?) hemoglobin concentrations were lower in SM group (10.39gr/dl vs 9.98 gr/dl vs 10.19 - 1.44 gr/dl vs 1.90 gr/dl vs 1.35; p = 0.047, p = 0.021; respectively) Hybrid fibroids were significantly more frequent in the EM group than subserosal myomectomy and control groups (respectively, 33.1% vs 23.3% vs 27.0%, p = 0.002). Surgery time was significantly longer in the subserosal myomectomy group than EM and control groups (respectively, 46.53 min vs 37.88 min vs 33.86 min, p = 0.001). Myomectomy took significantly longer time in the subserosal myomectomy than EM group (13.75 min vs 8.17 min, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Endometrial myomectomy is a feasible choice for treatment of fibroids during CS, and, basing on our results could be an alternative to traditional cesarean subserosal myomectomy.