OBJECTIVE: To compare the IVF results after salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound with IVF results in women with tubal infertility but without hydrosalpinx. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Sanatorium Pronatal, Na Dlouhé mezi 4/12, 147 00, Praha 4. METHODS: 101 women with tubal factor infertility were evaluated. In a prospective study we compared the results of first IVF cycle after salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound performed in 51 women (study group) with IVF results of 50 women with tubal infertility (confirmed by HSG and laparoscopy) but without hydrosalpinges and without salpingectomy. RESULTS: The maternal age in both groups (32.4 +/- 3.9 in salpingectomy group and 33.0 +/- 4.1 in control group), maximum estradiol levels (1392.6 +/- 675.8 pg/ml in salpingectomy group vers. 1624.7 +/- 909.7 pg/ml in control group), number of oocytes (11.3 +/- 5.8 after salpingectomy vers. 11.0 +/- 6.1 in controls), number of embryos generated (7.1 +/- 4.6 vers. 7.9 +/- 4.7) and number of embryos transferred were not statistically different. In their first IVF cycle after salpingectomy has been performed 30 women out of 51 became clinically pregnant (58.8%), while in control group a clinical pregnancy could be verified in 16 women (32.0%). Implantation rate in women after salpingectomy was 28.2% vers. 12.3% in control group. Both implantation rate and pregnancy rate were statistically different at 5% level of significance. CONCLUSION: After salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate are significantly better when compared to IVF patients with tubal infertility without the presence of hydrosalpinges and without salpingectomy. Salpingectomy should be offered to all patients with hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound. Moreover, this radical approach should be considered even in women with highly damaged tubes but without the presence of hydrosalpinges.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the IVF results after salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound with IVF results in women with tubal infertility but without hydrosalpinx. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Sanatorium Pronatal, Na Dlouhé mezi 4/12, 147 00, Praha 4. METHODS: 101 women with tubal factor infertility were evaluated. In a prospective study we compared the results of first IVF cycle after salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound performed in 51 women (study group) with IVF results of 50 women with tubal infertility (confirmed by HSG and laparoscopy) but without hydrosalpinges and without salpingectomy. RESULTS: The maternal age in both groups (32.4 +/- 3.9 in salpingectomy group and 33.0 +/- 4.1 in control group), maximum estradiol levels (1392.6 +/- 675.8 pg/ml in salpingectomy group vers. 1624.7 +/- 909.7 pg/ml in control group), number of oocytes (11.3 +/- 5.8 after salpingectomy vers. 11.0 +/- 6.1 in controls), number of embryos generated (7.1 +/- 4.6 vers. 7.9 +/- 4.7) and number of embryos transferred were not statistically different. In their first IVF cycle after salpingectomy has been performed 30 women out of 51 became clinically pregnant (58.8%), while in control group a clinical pregnancy could be verified in 16 women (32.0%). Implantation rate in women after salpingectomy was 28.2% vers. 12.3% in control group. Both implantation rate and pregnancy rate were statistically different at 5% level of significance. CONCLUSION: After salpingectomy of hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate are significantly better when compared to IVFpatients with tubal infertility without the presence of hydrosalpinges and without salpingectomy. Salpingectomy should be offered to all patients with hydrosalpinges visible on ultrasound. Moreover, this radical approach should be considered even in women with highly damaged tubes but without the presence of hydrosalpinges.
Authors: Pedro Melo; Ektoras X Georgiou; Neil Johnson; Sabine F van Voorst; Annika Strandell; Ben Willem J Mol; Christian Becker; Ingrid E Granne Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-10-22