Perrine Capmas1, Eva Suarthana2, Togas Tulandi3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada (all authors); Inserm, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, U1018, and Faculty of Medicine, University Paris Sud, Le Kremlin Bicêtre, France (Dr. Capmas). 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada (all authors). 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada (all authors). Electronic address: togas.tulandi@mcgill.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effect of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy outcomes, to compare different types of management of hydrosalpinx and their impact on pregnancy rates as well as on the ovarian reserve. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search using Pubmed, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and including all published studies that examined tubal infertility and its management (assisted reproductive technology or surgery) as well as the effects on ovarian reserve. The following medical subject headings (Mesh) terms combinations were used: "fallopian tube disease," hydrosalpinx," "tubal or salpinx occlusion or obstruction," "in vitro fertilization," "fallopian tube surgery," "salpingectomy," "salpingostomy," "infertility," "subfertility," "sterility" and "ovarian reserve." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: All randomized trials, cohort, and case controls studies were included. We excluded review articles, meeting abstracts, case series and case reports, and abstracts without access to full texts. The search was limited to trials in humans and published in English. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Our electronic search initially retrieved 6354 articles. Finally, 19 studies were included in the quantitative evaluation of the effects of hydrosalpinx: 23 in the qualitative evaluation and 5 in the quantitative evaluation of different types of hydrosalpinx treatments; and 17 in the quantitative evaluation of ovarian reserve. The presence of a hydrosalpinx was associated with decreased rates of implantation and clinical pregnancy, and increased rates of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Management of hydrosalpinx with salpingectomy, tubal occlusion, or hydrosalpinx aspiration led to better in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates. We found no difference in ovarian response to stimulation after salpingectomy except a decrease in antimüllerian hormone compared to no surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of hydrosalpinx is associated with decreased pregnancy rate and increased rates of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Management of hydrosalpinx, regardless of the type of treatment, leads to an increased chance of pregnancy.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effect of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy outcomes, to compare different types of management of hydrosalpinx and their impact on pregnancy rates as well as on the ovarian reserve. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search using Pubmed, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and including all published studies that examined tubal infertility and its management (assisted reproductive technology or surgery) as well as the effects on ovarian reserve. The following medical subject headings (Mesh) terms combinations were used: "fallopian tube disease," hydrosalpinx," "tubal or salpinx occlusion or obstruction," "in vitro fertilization," "fallopian tube surgery," "salpingectomy," "salpingostomy," "infertility," "subfertility," "sterility" and "ovarian reserve." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: All randomized trials, cohort, and case controls studies were included. We excluded review articles, meeting abstracts, case series and case reports, and abstracts without access to full texts. The search was limited to trials in humans and published in English. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Our electronic search initially retrieved 6354 articles. Finally, 19 studies were included in the quantitative evaluation of the effects of hydrosalpinx: 23 in the qualitative evaluation and 5 in the quantitative evaluation of different types of hydrosalpinx treatments; and 17 in the quantitative evaluation of ovarian reserve. The presence of a hydrosalpinx was associated with decreased rates of implantation and clinical pregnancy, and increased rates of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Management of hydrosalpinx with salpingectomy, tubal occlusion, or hydrosalpinx aspiration led to better in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates. We found no difference in ovarian response to stimulation after salpingectomy except a decrease in antimüllerian hormone compared to no surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of hydrosalpinx is associated with decreased pregnancy rate and increased rates of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Management of hydrosalpinx, regardless of the type of treatment, leads to an increased chance of pregnancy.