This document reviews surgical options for achieving patency in obstructed fallopian tubes and the factors that must be considered when deciding between surgical repair and IVF. This document replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2012 (Fertil Steril 2012;97:539–45).
tubal surgery versus IVF committee opinion ASRM, fallopian tube surgery patency obstructed tubes, tubal reanastomosis vs in vitro fertilization outcomes, role of tubal surgery assisted reproductive technology era, surgical repair fallopian tubes fertility restoration, ASRM guidelines tubal factor infertility treatment options, tubal ligation reversal versus IVF decision factors, salpingostomy neosalpingostomy tubal obstruction fertility, microsurgical tubal repair reproductive outcomes, proximal vs distal tubal obstruction surgical management
PMID 25958255 25958255 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.032 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.032 American Society for Reproductive Medicine et al. 2015, American Society for Reproductive Medicine 2015
Cite this article
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (2015). Role of tubal surgery in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a committee opinion. Fertility and sterility, 103(6), e37-e43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.032
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Role of tubal surgery in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(6):e37-e43. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.032
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. "Role of tubal surgery in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a committee opinion." Fertility and sterility, vol. 103, no. 6, 2015, pp. e37-e43.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2021·Fertility and Sterility
This document reviews surgical options for reparative tubal surgery and the factors that must be considered when deciding between surgical repair and in vitro fertilization. This document replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2012 (Fertil Steril 2015;103:e37-43). This document reviews surgical options for reparative tubal surgery and the factors that must be considered when deciding between surgical repair and in vitro fertilization.
To determine pregnancy rates (PR) after fimbrioplasty and salpingostomy in nonocclusive distal tubal disease. To evaluate the relative impact of various factors using contemporary statistical analysis. Prospective cohort. Tertiary institutional infertility clinic. PATIENTS(S): Infertility patients. INTERVENTION(S): Fimbrioplasty and salpingostomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cumulative PR, monthly fecundity rates, monthly probability of pregnancy, crude PR, and cure rates. RESULTS(S): Thirty-five percent of patients conceived with a cure rate of 72.2%, monthly probability of pregnancy of 3.9%, and monthly fecundity rate of 3.9%. Cumulative PRs were 22%, 35%, and 58% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Pairwise comparisons (unilateral, bilateral, or either) failed to detect any statistical difference between the salpingostomy and fimbrioplasty groups. Salpingostomy patients initially may have a higher tendency to become pregnant but appear to lose that advantage after the first few months. When patients with tubo-ovarian adhesions are excluded from the analysis, patients who underwent a bilateral salpingostomy as their sole procedure had better outcome compared with those who only underwent bilateral fimbrioplasty. There was no significant association between pregnancy outcome and the presence of endometriosis, other infertility factors, or tubo-ovarian adhesions. The staging of adnexal adhesions and endometriosis did not predict pregnancy outcome. CONCLUSION(S): Laparoscopic fimbrioplasty and salpingostomy are clinically efficacious for the treatment of nonocclusive distal tubal disease. After accounting for statistical interactions of various factors among them, no particular association with pregnancy outcome could be identified. This illustrates the need for a revision of the classification of patients with distal tubal disease.
To compare the prognostic value of salpingoscopy with a current classification system of adnexal adhesions and distal tubal occlusion in patients with tubal infertility undergoing reconstructive tubal surgery. Prospective clinical study. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Catholic University, a tertiary care University Center in Rome, Italy. Fifty-five infertile patients with either adnexal adhesions (29 patients) or hydrosalpinx (26 patients) undergoing reconstructive tubal surgery. Salpingoscopy performed concomitantly to salpingo-ovariolysis or salpingoneostomy at the time of either operative laparoscopy or laparotomy using microsurgical techniques. Salpingoscopic findings were compared with a current classification system of adnexal adhesions and distal tubal occlusion. The patients were followed for a mean follow-up of 49 months; the pregnancy rates achieved were correlated with the salpingoscopic findings and the classification system used. There was a significant correlation between the salpingoscopic grade and the occurrence of a term pregnancy for both the salpingo-ovariolysis and salpingoneostomy groups of patients. There was no significant correlation between the classification system used and the occurrence of a term pregnancy for both groups of patients. Salpingoscopy plays an important role in selecting the patients who may benefit the most from reconstructive tubal surgery.
Diagnostic Criteria and Classification · Staging and Classification Systems