Xiaoming Yu1, He Cai1, Xingbang Zheng1, Junyan Feng2, Jing Guan3. 1. Reproductive Medicine Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China. 2. Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China. 3. Reproductive Medicine Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China. guanjing6302@vip.sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study was carried out to clarify the IVF outcome after laparoscopic neosalpingostomy for infertile patients affected by hydrosalpinx stage III. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2010 to June 2015, 91 subjects of hydrosalpinx stage III were treated in out center by laparoscopic surgery before IVF cycle. 43 underwent neosalpingostomy (group 1) and the remaining 48 underwent salpingestomy (group 2). We compared these patients and their IVF outcomes after two different surgical techniques. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups, except a higher number of patients with bilaterial hydrosalpinges was noted in the neosalpingostomy group (79.1% vs. 56.3%, respectively). 25 patients with neosalpingostomy and 29 with salpingectomy achieved pregnancy by IVF. The ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle in group 1 and group 2 was 51.1 and 47.2%, respectively. Two cases of ampullary ectopic pregnancies were noted in group 1 and one case of right tube interstitial pregnancy in group 2. No significant difference was observed in live birth rate between the groups (48.9% vs. 45.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of IVF after neosalpingostomy were matchable with salpingectomy. For patients desire to preserve fallopian tubes, we recommend laparoscopic neosalpingostomy as an alternative choice to manage moderate hydrosalpinx before IVF.
OBJECTIVE: The study was carried out to clarify the IVF outcome after laparoscopic neosalpingostomy for infertilepatients affected by hydrosalpinx stage III. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2010 to June 2015, 91 subjects of hydrosalpinx stage III were treated in out center by laparoscopic surgery before IVF cycle. 43 underwent neosalpingostomy (group 1) and the remaining 48 underwent salpingestomy (group 2). We compared these patients and their IVF outcomes after two different surgical techniques. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups, except a higher number of patients with bilaterial hydrosalpinges was noted in the neosalpingostomy group (79.1% vs. 56.3%, respectively). 25 patients with neosalpingostomy and 29 with salpingectomy achieved pregnancy by IVF. The ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle in group 1 and group 2 was 51.1 and 47.2%, respectively. Two cases of ampullary ectopic pregnancies were noted in group 1 and one case of right tube interstitial pregnancy in group 2. No significant difference was observed in live birth rate between the groups (48.9% vs. 45.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of IVF after neosalpingostomy were matchable with salpingectomy. For patients desire to preserve fallopian tubes, we recommend laparoscopic neosalpingostomy as an alternative choice to manage moderate hydrosalpinx before IVF.
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