ReviewMaedica2025
The Role of Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecological Congenital Anomalies.
Review in Maedica, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Müllerian duct anomalies (MDAs) comprise a heterogeneous group of congenital malformations of the uterus, cervix and vagina that can impair menstruation, sexual function and fertility. Over the past three decades, minimally invasive techniques have largely replaced laparotomy for their surgical management; yet, data remain fragmented across small series and diverse anomaly types. Objective: To synthesize contemporary evidence on laparoscopic and robotic management of MDAs, highlighting indications, key surgical techniques and reproductive and functional outcomes, while addressing psychosocial and ethical considerations. Methods: A comprehensive narrative review was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar (January 1995-June 2024) using predefined Boolean combinations for specific anomalies and minimally invasive procedures. We included English-language, peer-reviewed clinical studies and sizable case series (n ≥ 3) reporting laparoscopic, laparoscopic-assisted, or robotic management of congenital uterine, cervical, or vaginal anomalies. The review was designed and reported in accordance with SANRA guidelines for narrative reviews. Results: Laparoscopy has become central to the management of fusion and obstructive anomalies. Laparoscopic Strassman metroplasty in selected bicornuate uteri and laparoscopic excision of rudimentary horns in unicornuate uteri achieve high rates of symptom relief, reduction in miscarriage risk, and subsequent term pregnancies, with fewer adhesions than open surgery. In uterus didelphys and obstructed hemivagina and ipsilateral renal anomaly (OHVIRA), combined vaginal and laparoscopic approaches effectively relieve obstruction while preserving the functional uterus. For vaginal agenesis in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome, laparoscopic Vecchietti, Davydov and sigmoid vaginoplasties consistently provide anatomically adequate neovaginas and satisfactory sexual function. Robotic assistance facilitates complex suturing in selected reconstructions, but clear superiority over conventional laparoscopy has not been demonstrated. Conclusions: Minimally invasive surgery has transformed the management of MDAs by enabling effective correction of complex malformations with reduced morbidity and favorable reproductive and functional outcomes in appropriately selected patients. However, the evidence base is dominated by observational studies from specialized centers, with limited standardized reporting of fertility and psychosexual endpoints. Future multicenter, prospective research integrating uniform classification, core outcome sets and long-term psychosocial follow-up is needed to refine patient selection and optimize care pathways.
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.