JLJiongbo Liao
Papers(3)
Comparison of the eff…Constructing a predic…Laparoscopic Resectio…
Collaborators(10)
Zhiying XuXiaojun ChenQing LinWanying ZhouWei LiuWeimin TanWeiwei ShanWenyu ShaoYiqin WangYulan Ren
Institutions(6)
Obstetrics And Gyneco…Nanyang Technological…KU LeuvenFirst Teaching Hospit…Peking University Peo…Fudan University

Papers

Comparison of the effect of oral megestrol acetate with or without levonorgestrel-intrauterine system on fertility-preserving treatment in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer: a prospective, open-label, randomized controlled phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03241914)

To evaluate the effect of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) plus oral megestrol acetate (MA) as fertility-preserving treatment in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer (EEC). In this single-center, phase II study with open-label, randomized and controlled design, young patients (18-45 years) diagnosed with primary EEC were screened, who strongly required fertility-preserving treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into MA group (160 mg oral daily) or MA (160 mg oral daily) plus LNG-IUS group. Pathologic evaluation on endometrium retrieved by hysteroscopy was performed every 3 months. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate within 16 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints were CR rate within 32 weeks of treatment, adverse events, recurrent and pregnancy rate. Between July 2017 and June 2020, 63 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. Totally 56 patients (26 in MA group; 28 in MA + LNG-IUS group) were included into primary-endpoint analyses. The median follow-up was 31.6 months (range, 3.1-94.0). No significant difference in 16-week CR rate were found between MA and MA + LNG-IUS groups (19.2% vs. 25.0%, p=0.610; odds ratio=1.40; 95% confidence interval=0.38-5.12), while the 32-week CR rates were also similar (57.1% and 61.5%, p=0.743), accordingly. More women in MA + LNG-IUS group experienced vaginal hemorrhage (46.4% vs. 16.1%; p=0.012) compared with MA group. No intergroup difference was found regarding recurrence or pregnancy rate. Compared with MA alone, the addition of LNG-IUS may not improve the early CR rate for EEC, and may produce more adverse events instead. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03241914.

Laparoscopic Resection of a Parasitic Leiomyoma of Mesentery Following Myomectomy

To illustrate the laparoscopic removal of a parasitic leiomyoma in the mesentery, which developed from a morcellation remnant following a laparoscopic myomectomy. University hospital. A stepwise surgical demonstration with narrated video footage. A patient with a large pelvic mass two years after undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy. The 31-year-old patient underwent laparoscopic myomectomy approximately two years prior, with no record of contained morcellation. Based on our inference, it is likely that a retrieval bag was not utilized during the previous fibroid morcellation. The postoperative pathology was confirmed as leiomyoma. She presented with abdominal bloating. An ultrasound at our hospital revealed an 8.2cm x 8.3cm x 7.3cm hypoechoic, irregular mass on the right side of the uterus. Pelvic magnetic resonance images (MRI) showed a mass of 6.9cm x 5.2cm x 9.7cm in the right anterior uterus with clear margins, hypointense on T2-weighted imaging, isointense on T1-weighted imaging, and significant post-contrast enhancement. Cancer antigen 125 and 199 were in normal range. Laparoscopy was performed, following these key steps: First, identifying the location of the mass and the orientation of the intestinal tract. Second, opening the pseudocapsule along the longitudinal axis of the mass. Third, gradually separating the mass from mesentery. Fourth, suturing the wound of mesentery. Finally, performing contained electromechanical morcellation. The final pathology confirmed leiomyoma. The laparoscopic resection of a parasitic leiomyoma in the mesentery is feasible and safe. The critical point of the procedure is to confirm the orientation of intestinal tract and identify the anatomical space between the mass and mesentery [1]. It is possible that the use of a contained retrieval bag could have prevented the need for this surgery.

3Papers
17Collaborators
1Trials
Endometrial NeoplasmsNeoplasm Invasiveness