Comparative Analysis of Electrosurgical Energy and Hemostatic Sealant for Hemostasis in Laparoscopic Ovarian Cystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Phase III Study

Study objective: To evaluate the efficacy of hemostatic sealant versus elertrosurgical energy in achieving hemostasis and preserving postoperative ovarian reserve during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial SETTING: Single center study PATIENTS: A total of 121 patients undergoing laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either hemostatic sealant or elertrosurgical energy for hemostasis during surgery MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measured was the time required to achieve hemostasis. Secondary outcomes included operating time, estimated blood loss, and assessment of postoperative ovarian reserve through hormone levels (AMH, FSH, E2, Inhibin) at three follow-up intervals. The results showed comparable hemostasis times between the two groups. Postoperative hormone levels indicated no significant differences in the impact on ovarian reserve between the groups, except in cases of bilateral ovarian cystectomy (BOC), where the hemostatic sealant group exhibited a lesser decline in AMH levels.

Conclusion: Both hemostatic sealant and electrosurgical energy showed equivalent effectiveness in achieving hemostasis during laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy, with comparable results in hemostasis time, blood loss, postoperative complications, and ovarian reserve preservation. However, in cases of bilateral ovarian cystectomy (BOC), the hemostatic sealant group exhibited a lesser decline in AMH levels, suggesting a potential advantage in preserving ovarian reserve in these specific cases.