Loading…
Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review
Objective We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation. Background Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since i...
Saved in:
Published in: | Annals of pediatric surgery 2022-04, Vol.18 (1), p.1-7, Article 24 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d3928c391e072dfcb024ed63197b19246e892e933cd4738f2c194e8037c547123 |
container_end_page | 7 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Annals of pediatric surgery |
container_volume | 18 |
creator | Metcalfe, Kiloran Ghattaura, Harmit Elbourne, Ceri Ashour, Khaled Lane, Sheila Lakhoo, Kokila |
description | Objective
We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation.
Background
Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since its introduction in England in 2013. Traditionally, laparoscopic oophorectomy is performed using a 3-port technique with an umbilical port and 2 smaller 5-mm working ports. Energy devices can be used to allow haemostatic dissection of the ovary and this is delivered through the umbilical port site. In an attempt to improve efficiency, post-operative outcomes, and enhance cosmesis; our department initiated the use of the Applied Medical GelPoint Mini Advanced Access Platform single port technique using a vertical trans-umbilical approach for ovarian cryopreservation.
Methods
All patients undergoing laparoscopic oophorectomy for cryopreservation between September 2013 and August 2017 were included. The patients were consented for SILS, 3-port and open oophorectomies. All patients received maximum local anaesthetic wound infiltration intra-operatively. Case notes and theatre electronic data were reviewed and data was collected on additional procedure, conversion rate, operative time, post-operative analgesia requirement, complications and length of hospital stay.
Results
A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic oophorectomy during the study period. Of these, 40 underwent conventional 3-port, 65 had SILS and 1 patient had open. No cases were converted from the intended method. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean operative time; with SILS being faster than the conventional 3-port method (SILS: 40.4 min; 3-port: 51.7 min;
p
= 0.017). There was no difference in length of stay or perioperative analgesics, and complication rates in both groups were low. Informal qualitative feedback included surgeons stating that the ovary was much easier to deliver using the SILS technique. Patients were also happy with a single cosmetically appeasing scar hidden within the umbilicus.
Conclusion
SILS is an acceptable technique in ovarian cryopreservation allowing a quicker operative time, easier delivery of the ovary, and better cosmesis. A learning curve is recognised due to the ergonomics of single port laparoscopy; however, the technique can be established easily in departments with existing laparoscopic capabilities. This is the first paper which estab |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s43159-022-00161-8 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_f04fe27c694045a89370736a14d8e712</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_f04fe27c694045a89370736a14d8e712</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2730343084</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d3928c391e072dfcb024ed63197b19246e892e933cd4738f2c194e8037c547123</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhaMKpFalL8DKEmsX_yW22aEraCtVYgNry3UmF1-ldhj7Bt0X4XnrNghY4Y2t8TnfaOZ03VvOrjk3w_uiJO8tZUJQxvjAqTnrLgSzjPbSqlf_vM-7q1IOrJ1eDJbri-7XLqcVUo05-ZlIumSsZC3XpMS0n4HGFGJpn2T2i8dcQl5iIDkv3zNCqPnxRKaMJK8eo08k4CkvCAVw9c9MEhNZPIzRV2y-csQ94OkD8QShNtzSGHEFEnwBmnKFVl8j_HzTvZ78XODq933Zffv86evult5_ubnbfbynQSld6SitMEFaDkyLcQoPTCgYB8mtfuBWqAGMFWClDKPS0kwicKvAMKlDrzQX8rK727hj9ge3YHz0eHLZR_dSyLh3HmsMM7iJqQmEDoNVTPXeWKmZloPnajSwsd5trAXzjyOU6g75iG2txQktmVSSGdVUYlOFNn5BmP505cw9x-m2OF2L073E6Uwzyc1Umji1Ff5F_8f1BKKnpGQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2730343084</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Springer Nature - SpringerLink Journals - Fully Open Access </source><creator>Metcalfe, Kiloran ; Ghattaura, Harmit ; Elbourne, Ceri ; Ashour, Khaled ; Lane, Sheila ; Lakhoo, Kokila</creator><creatorcontrib>Metcalfe, Kiloran ; Ghattaura, Harmit ; Elbourne, Ceri ; Ashour, Khaled ; Lane, Sheila ; Lakhoo, Kokila</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation.
Background
Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since its introduction in England in 2013. Traditionally, laparoscopic oophorectomy is performed using a 3-port technique with an umbilical port and 2 smaller 5-mm working ports. Energy devices can be used to allow haemostatic dissection of the ovary and this is delivered through the umbilical port site. In an attempt to improve efficiency, post-operative outcomes, and enhance cosmesis; our department initiated the use of the Applied Medical GelPoint Mini Advanced Access Platform single port technique using a vertical trans-umbilical approach for ovarian cryopreservation.
Methods
All patients undergoing laparoscopic oophorectomy for cryopreservation between September 2013 and August 2017 were included. The patients were consented for SILS, 3-port and open oophorectomies. All patients received maximum local anaesthetic wound infiltration intra-operatively. Case notes and theatre electronic data were reviewed and data was collected on additional procedure, conversion rate, operative time, post-operative analgesia requirement, complications and length of hospital stay.
Results
A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic oophorectomy during the study period. Of these, 40 underwent conventional 3-port, 65 had SILS and 1 patient had open. No cases were converted from the intended method. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean operative time; with SILS being faster than the conventional 3-port method (SILS: 40.4 min; 3-port: 51.7 min;
p
= 0.017). There was no difference in length of stay or perioperative analgesics, and complication rates in both groups were low. Informal qualitative feedback included surgeons stating that the ovary was much easier to deliver using the SILS technique. Patients were also happy with a single cosmetically appeasing scar hidden within the umbilicus.
Conclusion
SILS is an acceptable technique in ovarian cryopreservation allowing a quicker operative time, easier delivery of the ovary, and better cosmesis. A learning curve is recognised due to the ergonomics of single port laparoscopy; however, the technique can be established easily in departments with existing laparoscopic capabilities. This is the first paper which establishes this within a Paediatric Surgical setting, and adult literature suggests that further prospective trials may prove some benefit in ovarian tissue volume or time to initiation of treatment due to enhanced recovery.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2090-5394</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1687-4137</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2090-5394</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s43159-022-00161-8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Analgesics ; Bone marrow ; Chemotherapy ; Children & youth ; Cryopreservation ; Drug dosages ; Fertility ; Laparoscopy ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Oncology ; Oophorectomy ; Original Research ; Ostomy ; Ovaries ; Ovary ; Patients ; Pediatrics ; Single-incision laparoscopy ; Stem cell transplantation ; Surgery</subject><ispartof>Annals of pediatric surgery, 2022-04, Vol.18 (1), p.1-7, Article 24</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d3928c391e072dfcb024ed63197b19246e892e933cd4738f2c194e8037c547123</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0539-5059</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2730343084/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2730343084?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Metcalfe, Kiloran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghattaura, Harmit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elbourne, Ceri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ashour, Khaled</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Sheila</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lakhoo, Kokila</creatorcontrib><title>Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review</title><title>Annals of pediatric surgery</title><addtitle>Ann Pediatr Surg</addtitle><description>Objective
We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation.
Background
Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since its introduction in England in 2013. Traditionally, laparoscopic oophorectomy is performed using a 3-port technique with an umbilical port and 2 smaller 5-mm working ports. Energy devices can be used to allow haemostatic dissection of the ovary and this is delivered through the umbilical port site. In an attempt to improve efficiency, post-operative outcomes, and enhance cosmesis; our department initiated the use of the Applied Medical GelPoint Mini Advanced Access Platform single port technique using a vertical trans-umbilical approach for ovarian cryopreservation.
Methods
All patients undergoing laparoscopic oophorectomy for cryopreservation between September 2013 and August 2017 were included. The patients were consented for SILS, 3-port and open oophorectomies. All patients received maximum local anaesthetic wound infiltration intra-operatively. Case notes and theatre electronic data were reviewed and data was collected on additional procedure, conversion rate, operative time, post-operative analgesia requirement, complications and length of hospital stay.
Results
A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic oophorectomy during the study period. Of these, 40 underwent conventional 3-port, 65 had SILS and 1 patient had open. No cases were converted from the intended method. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean operative time; with SILS being faster than the conventional 3-port method (SILS: 40.4 min; 3-port: 51.7 min;
p
= 0.017). There was no difference in length of stay or perioperative analgesics, and complication rates in both groups were low. Informal qualitative feedback included surgeons stating that the ovary was much easier to deliver using the SILS technique. Patients were also happy with a single cosmetically appeasing scar hidden within the umbilicus.
Conclusion
SILS is an acceptable technique in ovarian cryopreservation allowing a quicker operative time, easier delivery of the ovary, and better cosmesis. A learning curve is recognised due to the ergonomics of single port laparoscopy; however, the technique can be established easily in departments with existing laparoscopic capabilities. This is the first paper which establishes this within a Paediatric Surgical setting, and adult literature suggests that further prospective trials may prove some benefit in ovarian tissue volume or time to initiation of treatment due to enhanced recovery.</description><subject>Analgesics</subject><subject>Bone marrow</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Children & youth</subject><subject>Cryopreservation</subject><subject>Drug dosages</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Oophorectomy</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Ostomy</subject><subject>Ovaries</subject><subject>Ovary</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Single-incision laparoscopy</subject><subject>Stem cell transplantation</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><issn>2090-5394</issn><issn>1687-4137</issn><issn>2090-5394</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhaMKpFalL8DKEmsX_yW22aEraCtVYgNry3UmF1-ldhj7Bt0X4XnrNghY4Y2t8TnfaOZ03VvOrjk3w_uiJO8tZUJQxvjAqTnrLgSzjPbSqlf_vM-7q1IOrJ1eDJbri-7XLqcVUo05-ZlIumSsZC3XpMS0n4HGFGJpn2T2i8dcQl5iIDkv3zNCqPnxRKaMJK8eo08k4CkvCAVw9c9MEhNZPIzRV2y-csQ94OkD8QShNtzSGHEFEnwBmnKFVl8j_HzTvZ78XODq933Zffv86evult5_ubnbfbynQSld6SitMEFaDkyLcQoPTCgYB8mtfuBWqAGMFWClDKPS0kwicKvAMKlDrzQX8rK727hj9ge3YHz0eHLZR_dSyLh3HmsMM7iJqQmEDoNVTPXeWKmZloPnajSwsd5trAXzjyOU6g75iG2txQktmVSSGdVUYlOFNn5BmP505cw9x-m2OF2L073E6Uwzyc1Umji1Ff5F_8f1BKKnpGQ</recordid><startdate>20220412</startdate><enddate>20220412</enddate><creator>Metcalfe, Kiloran</creator><creator>Ghattaura, Harmit</creator><creator>Elbourne, Ceri</creator><creator>Ashour, Khaled</creator><creator>Lane, Sheila</creator><creator>Lakhoo, Kokila</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>SpringerOpen</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0539-5059</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220412</creationdate><title>Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review</title><author>Metcalfe, Kiloran ; Ghattaura, Harmit ; Elbourne, Ceri ; Ashour, Khaled ; Lane, Sheila ; Lakhoo, Kokila</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d3928c391e072dfcb024ed63197b19246e892e933cd4738f2c194e8037c547123</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Analgesics</topic><topic>Bone marrow</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Children & youth</topic><topic>Cryopreservation</topic><topic>Drug dosages</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Oophorectomy</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Ostomy</topic><topic>Ovaries</topic><topic>Ovary</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Single-incision laparoscopy</topic><topic>Stem cell transplantation</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Metcalfe, Kiloran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghattaura, Harmit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elbourne, Ceri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ashour, Khaled</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Sheila</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lakhoo, Kokila</creatorcontrib><collection>SpringerOpen</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest - Health & Medical Complete保健、医学与药学数据库</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Annals of pediatric surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Metcalfe, Kiloran</au><au>Ghattaura, Harmit</au><au>Elbourne, Ceri</au><au>Ashour, Khaled</au><au>Lane, Sheila</au><au>Lakhoo, Kokila</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review</atitle><jtitle>Annals of pediatric surgery</jtitle><stitle>Ann Pediatr Surg</stitle><date>2022-04-12</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>7</epage><pages>1-7</pages><artnum>24</artnum><issn>2090-5394</issn><issn>1687-4137</issn><eissn>2090-5394</eissn><abstract>Objective
We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation.
Background
Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since its introduction in England in 2013. Traditionally, laparoscopic oophorectomy is performed using a 3-port technique with an umbilical port and 2 smaller 5-mm working ports. Energy devices can be used to allow haemostatic dissection of the ovary and this is delivered through the umbilical port site. In an attempt to improve efficiency, post-operative outcomes, and enhance cosmesis; our department initiated the use of the Applied Medical GelPoint Mini Advanced Access Platform single port technique using a vertical trans-umbilical approach for ovarian cryopreservation.
Methods
All patients undergoing laparoscopic oophorectomy for cryopreservation between September 2013 and August 2017 were included. The patients were consented for SILS, 3-port and open oophorectomies. All patients received maximum local anaesthetic wound infiltration intra-operatively. Case notes and theatre electronic data were reviewed and data was collected on additional procedure, conversion rate, operative time, post-operative analgesia requirement, complications and length of hospital stay.
Results
A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic oophorectomy during the study period. Of these, 40 underwent conventional 3-port, 65 had SILS and 1 patient had open. No cases were converted from the intended method. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean operative time; with SILS being faster than the conventional 3-port method (SILS: 40.4 min; 3-port: 51.7 min;
p
= 0.017). There was no difference in length of stay or perioperative analgesics, and complication rates in both groups were low. Informal qualitative feedback included surgeons stating that the ovary was much easier to deliver using the SILS technique. Patients were also happy with a single cosmetically appeasing scar hidden within the umbilicus.
Conclusion
SILS is an acceptable technique in ovarian cryopreservation allowing a quicker operative time, easier delivery of the ovary, and better cosmesis. A learning curve is recognised due to the ergonomics of single port laparoscopy; however, the technique can be established easily in departments with existing laparoscopic capabilities. This is the first paper which establishes this within a Paediatric Surgical setting, and adult literature suggests that further prospective trials may prove some benefit in ovarian tissue volume or time to initiation of treatment due to enhanced recovery.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1186/s43159-022-00161-8</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0539-5059</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2090-5394 |
ispartof | Annals of pediatric surgery, 2022-04, Vol.18 (1), p.1-7, Article 24 |
issn | 2090-5394 1687-4137 2090-5394 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_f04fe27c694045a89370736a14d8e712 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Springer Nature - SpringerLink Journals - Fully Open Access |
subjects | Analgesics Bone marrow Chemotherapy Children & youth Cryopreservation Drug dosages Fertility Laparoscopy Medicine Medicine & Public Health Oncology Oophorectomy Original Research Ostomy Ovaries Ovary Patients Pediatrics Single-incision laparoscopy Stem cell transplantation Surgery |
title | Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T03%3A49%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Conventional%203-port%20vs.%20single-incision%20laparoscopic%20oophorectomy%20for%20ovarian%20cryopreservation%20in%20paediatric%20surgery:%20a%20retrospective%20case-note%20review&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20pediatric%20surgery&rft.au=Metcalfe,%20Kiloran&rft.date=2022-04-12&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=7&rft.pages=1-7&rft.artnum=24&rft.issn=2090-5394&rft.eissn=2090-5394&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s43159-022-00161-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2730343084%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d3928c391e072dfcb024ed63197b19246e892e933cd4738f2c194e8037c547123%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2730343084&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |