MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407996529 · doi:10.4103/gmit.gmit_34_24

Laparoscopic Enucleation of a Cervical Myoma and Reconstruction of Cervical Canal

2025· article· en· W4407996529 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ning-Shiuan Ting, Dah-Ching Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnucleationMedicineMyomaCervical canalSurgeryCervixUterusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE Uterine myoma is a prevalent benign tumor in the reproductive tract of females, which is estimated to occupy 25%–30% of the incidence in reproductive-age females.[1] While many patients remain asymptomatic, those with heavy uterine bleeding, severe pelvic pain, or infertility may require surgery. The usual treatment involves surgery.[2] Nevertheless, medical approaches such as hormonal therapy using gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or uterine artery embolization are desired. Surgical management includes laparotomy or laparoscopy. However, laparoscopic myomectomy removing cervical myomas is challenging due to difficulties in resection, enucleation, and suture defects of the myometrium, which lead to increased blood loss and surgical time.[3-5] This study aims to illustrate the viability of excision of cervical myoma and reconstruction of the cervical canal laparoscopically. DESIGN We make a video presentation of the surgical procedure (Canadian Task Force Classification III-C). Video (laparoscopic cervical myomectomy and reconstruction of the cervical canal). PATIENT A 42-year-old nulliparous woman presented with menorrhagia for 5 months. Ultrasonography revealed a 4.5 cm × 3.2 cm myoma in the cervical region and another myoma 3.7 cm × 3.7 cm intramural myoma in the posterior wall. Laparoscopic myomectomy was recommended for her menorrhagia-caused anemia. Her hemoglobin was 6.8 g/dL and rose to 8.0 g/dL after blood transfusion. INTERVENTION The laparoscopic port setting included one glove port (NELIS, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea) and two axillary ports. Before the incision, a 1:50 dilution of vasopressin was injected into the myoma region. No uterine artery occlusion was performed before the myomectomy.[6] The procedure involved a longitudinal incision using a unipolar scissor, fixation with a myoma screw, and enucleation by Ligasure instrument (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) [Figure 1]. After the enucleation of myoma, the cervical canal was exposed. After inserting a #8 Foley catheter through the cervical external os under laparoscopic direct vision, the cervical canal was closed with 1-0 V-loc (Medtronic) in multiple layers. During the surgery, the total amount of blood lost was 125 mL, the myoma weighed 85 g, and the procedure lasted around 143 min. The surgery went smoothly without complications, and the patient was discharged 2 days later. The intrauterine catheter was removed on the discharge day. No issues were noted at the follow-up. Histopathological inspection revealed leiomyoma of the uterus.Figure 1: Laparoscopic cervical myomectomy. http://www.apagemit.com/page/video/show.aspx?num=332&kind=2&page=1CONCLUSION The laparoscopic treatment of cervical myomas and the reconstruction of the cervical canal pose a challenge, yet it seems to be a viable and secure surgical alternative. Declaration of patient consent The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient has given her consent for her images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patient understands that name and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed. Author contributions Conceptualization: D-C.D.; methodology: N-S.T.; software: N-S.T.; validation: D-C.D.; video eiting: N-S.T. and D-C.D.; formal analysis: D-C.D.; interpretation of N-S.T. and D-C.D.; resources: D-C.D.; data curation: N-S.T. and D-C.D.; writing: N-S.T. and D-C.D.; original draft preparation: N-S.T. and D-C.D.; review and editing: N-S.T. and D-C.D.; supervision: D-C.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Data availability statement All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest Prof. Dah-Ching Ding, an editorial board member at Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy, had no role in the peer review process of or decision to publish this article. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest in writing this paper.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGynecology and Minimally Invasive TherapySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207