American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 114(2), 280-281, 1972
Abstract not indexed. Read at publisher
Topics
Stein-Leventhal syndrome polycystic ovary early description, Stein-Leventhal syndrome diagnosis treatment 1972, polycystic ovary syndrome historical nomenclature, PCOS Stein-Leventhal hyperandrogenism anovulation, Stein-Leventhal syndrome wedge resection ovary, Halbe Fonseca Stein-Leventhal syndrome, polycystic ovarian disease classic description, PCOS historical perspective bilateral polycystic ovaries, Stein-Leventhal syndrome amenorrhea hirsutism obesity, early PCOS literature ovarian pathology
PMID 4673811 4673811 DOI 10.1016/0002-9378(72)90079-8 10.1016/0002-9378(72)90079-8 Halbe et al. 1972, Halbe 1972
Cite this article
Halbe, H. W., da Fonseca, A. M., de Paula e Silva, P., Clauzet, R. B., & Galluci, J. (1972). Stein-Leventhal syndrome. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 114(2), 280-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(72)90079-8
Halbe HW, da Fonseca AM, de Paula e Silva P, Clauzet RB, Galluci J. Stein-Leventhal syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1972;114(2):280-281. doi:10.1016/0002-9378(72)90079-8
Halbe, Hans Wolfgang, et al. "Stein-Leventhal syndrome." American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 114, no. 2, 1972, pp. 280-281.
Keywords
Female, Humans, Infertility, Female/therapy, Menstruation, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome/surgery, Pregnancy
Related articles
Surgical Treatment · Ovarian Wedge Resection
Long-term clinical effects of ovarian wedge resection in polycystic ovarian syndrome
Hjortrup A et al., 1983 · Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ·
Twenty-nine consecutive patients with polycystic ovary (PCO) syndrome (defined as hirsutism plus oligomenorrhea or secondary amenorrhea, and excluding Cushing's syndrome, an androgen-secreting adrenal or ovarian tumor or adrenocortical hyperplasia) were treated with ovarian wedge resection leaving normal-sized ovaries. Long-term follow-up from 2.3-9.5 years (mean 5.7 years) showed that 26 of 29 patients (90%) had established normal menstrual cycles. Fertility and normal pregnancies were achieved in all 10 patients (100%) with normal postoperative menstrual cycles who desired to conceive, but not in the 3 patients with remaining postoperative oligomenorrhea. Eight of 9 patients who were obese preoperatively and who had normal postoperative menstrual cycles showed a major weight loss after wedge resection. In contrast, none of the preoperatively obese patients, who remained oligomenorrheic after surgery, lost weight. Hirsutism was not cured by wedge resection. It is concluded that ovarian wedge resection should still be considered useful in patients with PCO.
Ovarian Surgery · Ovarian Reserve Preservation
Infertility following wedge resection of the ovaries
Toaff R et al., 1976 · Am J Obstet Gynecol ·
Seven cases of polycystic ovarian disease were investigated by laparoscopy and endocrinologic tests after failure of ovarian resection to restore fertility. One case of bilateral and two cases of unilateral ovarian atrophy were recorded. In all seven patients the common features were extensive perivarian and peritubal adhesions. Four of the six patients amenable to cure were submitted to reconstructive surgery; three of them conceived and had normal deliveries. The present observations support the plea to relegate the surgical approach to a minor position in patients with Stein-Leventhal syndrome and stress the importance of meticulous surgical technique in the performance of ovarian surgery. Laparoscopic investigation is mandatory in all cases of unsuccessful ovarian resection.
Ovarian Surgery · Ovarian Reserve Preservation
Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome
Bordewijk EM et al., 2020 · The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common condition affecting 8% to 13% of reproductive-aged women. In the past clomiphene citrate (CC) used to be the first-line treatment in women with PCOS. Ovulation induction with letrozole should be the first-line treatment according to new guidelines, but the use of letrozole is off-label. Consequently, CC is still commonly used. Approximately 20% of women on CC do not ovulate. Women who are CC-resistant can be treated with gonadotrophins or other medical ovulation-induction agents. These medications are not always successful, can be time-consuming and can cause adverse events like multiple pregnancies and cycle cancellation due to an excessive response. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) is a surgical alternative to medical treatment. There are risks associated with surgery, such as complications from anaesthesia, infection, and adhesions. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of LOD with or without medical ovulation induction compared with medical ovulation induction alone for women with anovulatory polycystic PCOS and CC-resistance. We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trials registers up to 8 October 2019, together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with anovulatory PCOS and CC resistance who underwent LOD with or without medical ovulation induction versus medical ovulation induction alone, LOD with assisted reproductive technologies (ART) versus ART, LOD with second-look laparoscopy versus expectant management, or different techniques of LOD. Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, extracted data and evaluated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE method. The primary effectiveness outcome was live birth and the primary safety outcome was multiple pregnancy. Pregnancy, miscarriage, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), ovulation, costs, and quality of life were secondary outcomes. This updated review includes 38 trials (3326 women). The evidence was very low- to moderate-quality; the main limitations were due to poor reporting of study methods, with downgrading for risks of bias (randomisation and allocation concealment) and lack of blinding. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling with or without medical ovulation induction versus medical ovulation induction alone Pooled results suggest LOD may decrease live birth slightly when compared with medical ovulation induction alone (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 0.92; 9 studies, 1015 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). The evidence suggest that if the chance of live birth following medical ovulation induction alone is 42%, the chance following LOD would be between 28% and 40%. The sensitivity analysis restricted to only RCTs with low risk of selection bias suggested there is uncertainty whether there is a difference between the treatments (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.36; 4 studies, 415 women; I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). LOD probably reduces multiple pregnancy rates (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.66; 14 studies, 1161 women; I2 = 2%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if we assume the risk of multiple pregnancy following medical ovulation induction is 5.0%, the risk following LOD would be between 0.9% and 3.4%. Restricting to RCTs that followed women for six months after LOD and six cycles of ovulation induction only, the results for live birth were consistent with the main analysis. There may be little or no difference between the treatments for the likelihood of a clinical pregnancy (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.03; 21 studies, 2016 women; I2 = 19%; low-quality evidence). There is uncertainty about the effect of LOD compared with ovulation induction alone on miscarriage (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.59; 19 studies, 1909 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). OHSS was a very rare event. LOD may reduce OHSS (Peto OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.91; 8 studies, 722 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Unilateral LOD versus bilateral LOD Due to the small sample size, the quality of evidence is insufficient to justify a conclusion on live birth (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.78; 1 study, 44 women; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available on multiple pregnancy. The likelihood of a clinical pregnancy is uncertain between the treatments, due to the quality of the evidence and the large heterogeneity between the studies (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84; 7 studies, 470 women; I2 = 60%, very low-quality evidence). Due to the small sample size, the quality of evidence is not sufficient to justify a conclusion on miscarriage (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.33; 2 studies, 131 women; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Other comparisons Due to lack of evidence and very low-quality data there is uncertainty whether there is a difference for any of the following comparisons: LOD with IVF versus IVF, LOD with second-look laparoscopy versus expectant management, monopolar versus bipolar LOD, and adjusted thermal dose versus fixed thermal dose. AUTHORS' Laparoscopic ovarian drilling with and without medical ovulation induction may decrease the live birth rate in women with anovulatory PCOS and CC resistance compared with medical ovulation induction alone. But the sensitivity analysis restricted to only RCTs at low risk of selection bias suggests there is uncertainty whether there is a difference between the treatments, due to uncertainty around the estimate. Moderate-quality evidence shows that LOD probably reduces the number of multiple pregnancy. Low-quality evidence suggests that there may be little or no difference between the treatments for the likelihood of a clinical pregnancy, and there is uncertainty about the effect of LOD compared with ovulation induction alone on miscarriage. LOD may result in less OHSS. The quality of evidence is insufficient to justify a conclusion on live birth, clinical pregnancy or miscarriage rate for the analysis of unilateral LOD versus bilateral LOD. There were no data available on multiple pregnancy.
Ovarian Surgery · Ovarian Reserve Preservation
Chapter 75: PEARS for Polycystic Ovaries: Ovarian Wedge Resection
Hilgers TW, 2004 · The Medical and Surgical Practice of NaProTECHNOLOGY ·
Ovarian wedge resection reduces androgen-producing stromal tissue in women with polycystic ovary syndrome who have failed medical ovulation induction, restoring spontaneous or treatment-responsive ovulatory cycles. Within NaProTECHNOLOGY, the procedure is performed with precise tissue economy and anti-adhesion technique to preserve ovarian reserve while correcting the underlying hormonal dysfunction identified through CrMS biomarker monitoring.