Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction colectomy versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal resection in patients with rectal endometriosis: a randomized, controlled trial

The conventional laparoscopic approach for the surgical management of deep endometriosis (DE) infiltrating the rectum appears to ensure improved digestive functional outcomes. The natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) technique for the treatment of colorectal DE can significantly accelerate postoperative recovery; however, data on gastrointestinal function following conventional laparoscopic segmental bowel resection (CLR) compared with NOSE colectomy (NC) for DE are sparse.Between 30 September 2019 and 31 December 2020, a randomized, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group controlled trial with women aged 18-45 years was conducted at University Hospital.Ninety-nine patients were randomized to CLR or NC, with DE infiltrating at least the muscular layer, at least 50% of the circumference of the bowel, up to 15 cm from the anal verge, exhibiting pain and bowel symptoms and/or infertility. The primary endpoint was bowel function, represented by low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Secondary parameters included the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP30), Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores preoperatively and at set times (1 and 6 months, 1 year) following surgery.No significant differences were observed in the postoperative LARS scores, VAS, EHP30, and GIQLI between the NC and CLR groups. LARS scores did not reveal significant differences 12 months postoperatively compared to the preoperative values in both groups (CLR group P =0.93 versus NC group, P =0.87). GIQLI scores were significantly improved 12 months after the operation compared with baseline values in the CLR group ( P =0.002) and NC group ( P =0.001). Pain symptoms and quality of life scores significantly improved 12 months postoperatively in both groups.NC is a feasible surgical approach for treating patients with rectal DE. Our study did not show a statistically significant difference between CLR and NC techniques in mid-term digestive and pain outcomes.