OBJECTIVE: To examine the short-term effects of salpingectomy during laparoscopic hysterectomy on ovarian reserve when ovarian preservation is planned in view of determining the feasibility of conducting the study on a larger scale. DESIGN: Pilot randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Tertiary care, academic medical center. PATIENT(S): Thirty premenopausal women aged 18 to 45 years undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications from April 2012 to September 2012. INTERVENTION(S): Bilateral salpingectomy (n = 15) versus no salpingectomy (n = 15) at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Antimüllerian hormone (AMH) measured preoperatively, at 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 3 months postoperatively, with operative time and estimated blood loss abstracted from the medical records. RESULT(S): The mean AMH levels were not statistically significantly different at baseline (2.26 vs. 2.25 ng/ml), 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively (1.03 vs. 1.25 ng/ml), or 3 months postoperatively (1.86 vs. 1.82 ng/ml) among women with salpingectomy versus no salpingectomy, respectively. There was also no statistically significant temporal change in the mean AMH level from baseline to 3 months postoperatively (-0.07 vs. -0.08 ng/ml) between the two groups. No difference in operative time (116 vs. 115 minutes) or estimated blood loss (70 vs. 91 mL) was observed. CONCLUSION(S): Salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation is a safe procedure that does not appear to have any short-term deleterious effects on ovarian reserve, as measured by AMH level. Conducting a trial of this nature that is adequately powered with long-term follow-up evaluation would be feasible and is required to definitively confirm these results.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the short-term effects of salpingectomy during laparoscopic hysterectomy on ovarian reserve when ovarian preservation is planned in view of determining the feasibility of conducting the study on a larger scale. DESIGN: Pilot randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Tertiary care, academic medical center. PATIENT(S): Thirty premenopausal women aged 18 to 45 years undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications from April 2012 to September 2012. INTERVENTION(S): Bilateral salpingectomy (n = 15) versus no salpingectomy (n = 15) at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Antimüllerian hormone (AMH) measured preoperatively, at 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 3 months postoperatively, with operative time and estimated blood loss abstracted from the medical records. RESULT(S): The mean AMH levels were not statistically significantly different at baseline (2.26 vs. 2.25 ng/ml), 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively (1.03 vs. 1.25 ng/ml), or 3 months postoperatively (1.86 vs. 1.82 ng/ml) among women with salpingectomy versus no salpingectomy, respectively. There was also no statistically significant temporal change in the mean AMH level from baseline to 3 months postoperatively (-0.07 vs. -0.08 ng/ml) between the two groups. No difference in operative time (116 vs. 115 minutes) or estimated blood loss (70 vs. 91 mL) was observed. CONCLUSION(S): Salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation is a safe procedure that does not appear to have any short-term deleterious effects on ovarian reserve, as measured by AMH level. Conducting a trial of this nature that is adequately powered with long-term follow-up evaluation would be feasible and is required to definitively confirm these results.
Authors: Annemarie de Vet; Joop S E Laven; Frank H de Jong; Axel P N Themmen; Bart C J M Fauser Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Amy Finch; Mario Beiner; Jan Lubinski; Henry T Lynch; Pal Moller; Barry Rosen; Joan Murphy; Parviz Ghadirian; Eitan Friedman; William D Foulkes; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Teresa Wagner; Nadine Tung; Fergus Couch; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Peter Ainsworth; Mary Daly; Babara Pasini; Ruth Gershoni-Baruch; Charis Eng; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Jane McLennan; Beth Karlan; Jeffrey Weitzel; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-07-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: André Hazout; Philippe Bouchard; David B Seifer; P Aussage; Anne Marie Junca; Paul Cohen-Bacrie Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Jennifer M Wu; Mary Ellen Wechter; Elizabeth J Geller; Thao V Nguyen; Anthony G Visco Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Douglas A Levine; Peter A Argenta; Cindy J Yee; David S Marshall; Narciso Olvera; Faina Bogomolniy; Jamal A Rahaman; Mark E Robson; Kenneth Offit; Richard R Barakat; Robert A Soslow; Jeff Boyd Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Akila Subramaniam; Christina T Blanchard; Britt K Erickson; Jeff Szychowski; Charles A Leath; Joseph R Biggio; Warner K Huh Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Stephanie V Koebele; Justin M Palmer; Bryanna Hadder; Ryan Melikian; Carly Fox; Isabel M Strouse; Dale F DeNardo; Christina George; Emily Daunis; Adrianna Nimer; Loretta P Mayer; Cheryl A Dyer; Heather A Bimonte-Nelson Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: M Pölcher; S Hauptmann; C Fotopoulou; B Schmalfeldt; I Meinhold-Heerlein; A Mustea; I Runnebaum; J Sehouli Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Mary B Daly; Charles W Dresher; Melinda S Yates; Joanne M Jeter; Beth Y Karlan; David S Alberts; Karen H Lu Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2015-01-13
Authors: Ali Azadi; James A Bradley; Greg J Marchand; Douglas J Lorenz; David Doering; Donald R Ostergard Journal: Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther Date: 2021-01-30
Authors: Laura A M van Lieshout; Miranda P Steenbeek; Joanne A De Hullu; M Caroline Vos; Saskia Houterman; Jack Wilkinson; Jurgen Mj Piek Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-28