C Fleming1, M G Hull. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Bristol, St Michael's Hospital, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study whether the presence of hydrosalpinx affected success after in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in women with inflammatory tubal damage. DESIGN: Retrospective, nonrandomised study. SETTING: University private IVF clinic with complete fertility services. PARTICIPANTS: Two study groups (79 women with hydrosalpinges and 198 women with inflammatory tubal damage but no hydrosalpinx) and a third group (22 sterilised, previously fertile women) for comparison. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical pregnancy and livebirth rates per embryo transfer cycle; implantation and live baby rates per individual embryo transferred. RESULTS: The hydrosalpinx group had a significantly lower implantation rate per embryo (8.2%) and chance of a live baby per embryo transferred (5.6%), compared with the nonhydrosalpinx group (14.9% and 11.2%, respectively). The hydrosalpinx group also had a lower clinical pregnancy rate (23%) and live birth rate per transfer cycle (17%) compared with the nonhydrosalpinx group (30% and 26%), but these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a hydrosalpinx halves the chance of an embryo implanting, probably due to physical or toxic chemical effects of fluid draining from the hydrosalpinx into the uterine cavity. Women with hydrosalpinges may benefit from distal salpingostomy or salpingectomy as a drainage procedure before in vitro fertilisation treatment, even though such surgery may not increase the chances of natural conception.
OBJECTIVE: To study whether the presence of hydrosalpinx affected success after in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in women with inflammatory tubal damage. DESIGN: Retrospective, nonrandomised study. SETTING: University private IVF clinic with complete fertility services. PARTICIPANTS: Two study groups (79 women with hydrosalpinges and 198 women with inflammatory tubal damage but no hydrosalpinx) and a third group (22 sterilised, previously fertile women) for comparison. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical pregnancy and livebirth rates per embryo transfer cycle; implantation and live baby rates per individual embryo transferred. RESULTS: The hydrosalpinx group had a significantly lower implantation rate per embryo (8.2%) and chance of a live baby per embryo transferred (5.6%), compared with the nonhydrosalpinx group (14.9% and 11.2%, respectively). The hydrosalpinx group also had a lower clinical pregnancy rate (23%) and live birth rate per transfer cycle (17%) compared with the nonhydrosalpinx group (30% and 26%), but these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a hydrosalpinx halves the chance of an embryo implanting, probably due to physical or toxic chemical effects of fluid draining from the hydrosalpinx into the uterine cavity. Women with hydrosalpinges may benefit from distal salpingostomy or salpingectomy as a drainage procedure before in vitro fertilisation treatment, even though such surgery may not increase the chances of natural conception.
Authors: Kenan Omurtag; Natalia M Grindler; Kimberly A Roehl; Gordon Wright Bates; Angeline N Beltsos; Randall R Odem; Emily S Jungheim Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2012-03-09 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Kenan Omurtag; Natalia M Grindler; Kimberly A Roehl; G Wright Bates; Angeline N Beltsos; Randall R Odem; Emily S Jungheim Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Date: 2014-03-24 Impact factor: 3.828