Comparison of Laparoscopic Adnexal Mass Extraction Via the Transumbilical and Transvaginal Routes

Incisional pain score

Adnexal masses are a common clinical problem encountered in gynecological practice. Minimally
 invasive surgery (MIS) for ovarian pathologies has been adopted widely. Its goals are to
 minimize abdominal incisions and postoperative pain and to prevent incisional complications,
 such as incisional hernias and adhesions. Compared with open procedures, MIS is associated
 with faster recovery times, better patient quality of life, and lower postoperative
 complication rates. The removal of an adnexal mass from the abdominal cavity is performed
 most commonly using the suprapubic, umbilical, or vaginal route. Apart from these, mini
 laparoscopy can provide a better cosmetic result without additional operative time or
 complications. Despite the limited use of mini laparoscopy for gynecological procedures, its
 use has increased recently.
 
 After excision, an adnexal mass can be removed through a laparoscopic (LS) port using a
 variety of endoscopic or containment bags. After the mass has been placed in it, the bag is
 withdrawn, closed, and expelled through the skin incision with simultaneous trocar removal.
 When a mass is large or cannot be removed through the port, the incision may be enlarged
 slightly. This situation may yield a cosmetically worse outcome and increases the risk of
 postoperative complications, such as adhesion, hernia, and increased postoperative pain.
 Thus, natural orifice surgery (NOS) has emerged for tissue removal in such cases.
 
 This study was performed to compare the transumbilical (TU) and transvaginal (TV) routes for
 adnexal mass removal from the abdominal cavity