ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study is to investigate the feasibility of the laparoscopy and compare perioperative outcomes between laparoscopy and laparotomy in pregnant women with non-malignant ovarian tumor. METHODS: Retrospective comparative analysis of 56 pregnant women who underwent laparoscopy or laparotomy due to non-malignant ovarian tumors at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, between October 1994 and December 2010 were performed. RESULTS: Among 56 patients, 22 and 34 pregnant women underwent laparotomy and laparoscopy, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups about general characteristics including age, gestational age, torsion, surgeon type, pain at diagnosis and clinical outcomes including tocolytics use, operation type, operation time, the ratio of normal full-term vaginal delivery, Apgar score. However, pathological longest tumor size was larger in laparotomy group than laparoscopy group (9.0 cm vs. 5.8 cm; p=0.001) and laparoscopy was related with significantly less estimated blood loss (200 vs. 50 mL; p=0.001) and short hospital days (7 vs. 4 days; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy for the treatment of non-malignant ovarian tumors in pregnant women is feasible and has benefits such as less estimated blood loss during the surgery and hospital stays when compared with laparotomy. However, laparoscopic adnexal surgery for large tumor size may be still challenging in pregnant women.