ReviewCureus2025
Minimally Invasive Myomectomy: A Systematic Review of Techniques, Challenges, and Fertility Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uterine fibroids represent a prevalent gynecological condition with significant implications for fertility and quality of life. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety, and fertility outcomes of minimally invasive myomectomy (MIM) techniques, including laparoscopic myomectomy (LM), robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM), and single-port laparoscopic myomectomy (SPLM), and non-invasive approaches such as ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU). Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we analyzed 17 studies encompassing diverse surgical methods and reproductive outcomes, with quality assessment performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Key findings demonstrate that MIM techniques yield favorable fertility outcomes compared to traditional abdominal myomectomy. Among the included studies, 10 were rated as low risk of bias and 7 as moderate risk on the NOS. Laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy (LESS-M) and SPLM were associated with higher pregnancy rates (66.7% and 75%, respectively) and shorter time to conception (7.6 vs. 10.1 months for LESS-M vs. conventional LM). RALM showed promise in complex cases, with pregnancy rates of 13-66.7% and no reported uterine ruptures. Non-invasive USgHIFU offered comparable pregnancy rates to LM but was linked to shorter conception times and mixed fetal outcomes, including higher preterm birth rates. Surgical nuances, such as barbed versus nonbarbed sutures, did not significantly impact fertility, while fibroid characteristics and surgeon expertise played pivotal roles. Vaginal birth after LM was deemed safe, with no uterine ruptures reported in large cohorts. However, heterogeneity in study designs, retrospective biases, and limited long-term follow-up data underscore the need for standardized protocols and prospective trials. MIM techniques are a viable option for women seeking fertility preservation, offering reduced morbidity and comparable or superior reproductive outcomes. Future research should prioritize multicenter studies to optimize patient selection and surgical standardization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.