Paraovarialnaja a cyst and the future pregnancy

[yuna80]

The opinion of experts is necessary.



In a view of planned the first and late (me almost 36 years) pregnancy has addressed in med.tsentr. On US it has been received: the center of a diffusive or diffuse endometriosis, paraovarialnaja a cyst (21 18 and 23-25 on 19-21 (in mm) at repeated US in 1.5 months) in the left ovary, the sizes of a uterus (value or meanings;importance I can not result or bring - has not asked), according to, the doctor normal, on 8-th put tsikla-thickness endometrija 0.65 mm, at three US (for 3.5 months, all are made for 8 day of a cycle) - a dominant or prepotent follicle in the right ovary in the size 1.1 see, a hormonal background on US - normal (besides according to the doctor), therefore on delivery of analyses of hormones it is not sent yet.



Monthly absolutely painless, moderated or moderate. Smeared a little up to their beginning for 1-2 days and more day three after their termination or ending (i.e. 3-4 days + 3 days (smears a little), but it has arisen somewhere about 7 months ago (till this time in general problems was not). After vitamins on phases of a cycle (folic, In-complex, Aevitum, Ascorutinum), Milajfa (BAD) and Indomethacinum within 5 weeks the come or stepped new cycle has come or stepped normally, t.e did not smear in advance, but all rest (after) remains.



In the left ovary someone a dyscomfort I do not feel, but last year sometimes pulls from several o'clock about several days below a loin a little, at the left, at a heating leaves. Because of a cyst?



The doctor insists at first on lopare, then on pregnancy. Motivates with that quite probably cesarean (the age, easily rises pressure, - 7 and miopicheskie cones on an eyeground), therefore it is better at first lopara.



What will tell or say? Such sequence at such anamnesis is justified?

[The patient]

Olga,



By and large not essentially, there will be a laparoscopy up to pregnancy or after it or her, if a cyst paraovarialnaja. If paraovarialnaja a cyst small in operation there is no necessity.



The matter is that the cyst can be as near to an ovary, well actually an oothecoma - as a rule, before operation this question is very difficult for solving. But why you so are assured what a cyst - paraovarialnaja?

[friend-good]

Tatyana,

Thanks for the encouraging answer!



*quot; If paraovarialnaja a cyst small in operation is not present ?NiOn???O?*quot;



I it or her have written the size above: first time she has been accepted for a dominant or prepotent follicle (US I have been made for 10 day of a cycle, the sizes did not specify), second and third time - certain vaginalnym US (in one case namerjali 21 on 18 mm, in 1.5 months - 23-25 on 21 mm). Have told or said. That dynamics or changes of body height yet do not see, but she to them do not like. Such sizes are, in fact, a small cyst?





*quot; The matter is that the cyst can be as near to an ovary, well actually an oothecoma - as a rule, before operation this question very difficultly ON??Oy*quot;.



How much or As far as it essentially - *quot; Onn?*quot; or *quot; to be ?i?OoN??*quot;?



If at usual US it or her have confused with a dominant or prepotent follicle, it is possible to assume, what she is actually an oothecoma?



*quot; But why you so are assured what a cyst - paraovarialnaja? *quot;



Heh.... I what am not confident. It so confidently is spoken by my doctor. Can, I can be asked the doctor on following reception to prove the diagnosis?



I the day before yesterday was on reception and when it has been offered lapara, I have refused. Refer or have converged that I dosdaju analyses (immunnoglobuliny on viruses, a coagulogram), them look and then on rezultam give *quot; niO*quot; on attempts of conception within 3 months. If nothing will turn out, we come back to a question about lapare. I very much risk, having put on the first place pregnancy with prospective cesarean?

[Lyudmila. Century]

Olga,



After retelling the conclusions given to you, advice or councils and references I have more than questions, than answers to them.



At US it is very complex or difficult to solve, the cyst near to an ovary is located or it is an oothecoma. An ovary - a small organ and it or him not so it is simple *quot; Oo?nNOy*quot;.



As paraovarialnye cysts of any problems with genesial health do not frame, and to interfere until in this case it will not be necessary to obvious necessity.



1. The laparoscopy for excision paraovarialnoj cysts is necessary only in the event that the sizes of a cyst are very great (for example, more than 7 sm). And that, here is not present ekstrennosti, and there are bases to begin or start with conservative therapy (but chance of success very small).

2. The oothecoma on the conclusion of US can be the indication to operation (but too not urgent):

And. If conservative treatment (the various variants influencing a functional status of ovaries and blocking an ovulation) it is noneffective within 6 months.

. If there are features ehostruktury this cyst, assuming absence of effect from conservative treatment (a teratoma, a cystadenoma or endometrioidnaja a cyst?)

3. If there are bases to think, that strong painful sensations are connected with presence of a cyst (as a rule, enough greater or big sizes).



Presence of an oothecoma at the pregnant woman is not the indication to keserevu to section. And here the myopia and the reference of the oculist can quite be the basis for operation.



To estimate or appreciate as *quot; OaiOaNO*quot; the genesial system only on a picture of US is, definitely, something new and exclusive, - is a pity, that all other doctors about such cheap and angry opportunity do not guess.



Oothecomas and paraovarialnye - that is located near to it or him by means of BAD do not treat. BAD in general treat nothing.

[vladlenk]

Tatyana, big to you thanks!



You have encouraged me and have confirmed, that my ideas on refusal at the given stage from a laparoscopy were correct.



I only wish to add (muffledly I all I state, excuse): I, when wrote about prospective cesarean that proceeded, certainly, not because of presence of a cyst, and because of a myopia and a status of an eyeground, and as problems with pressure (and age).

And BAD to me has been written out not for treatment of a cyst, and as gepatoprotektora.



In general, thanks you for :-))