870 likes | 1.25k Views
Update on Reproductive Surgery. Prof T C LI Professor of Reproductive Medicine & Surgery Sheffield, England. Shenzhen, May 2013. Areas to be covered. Management of distal tubal disease Ovarian surgery revisited Haemostatic agent. Management of distal tubal disease. ?. Salpingostomy.
E N D
Update on Reproductive Surgery Prof T C LI Professor of Reproductive Medicine & Surgery Sheffield, England Shenzhen, May 2013
Areas to be covered • Management of distal tubal disease • Ovarian surgery revisited • Haemostatic agent
Management of distal tubal disease ? Salpingostomy IVF Salpingectomy
Management of distal tubal disease ? Salpingostomy IVF Salpingectomy Answer: it depends
SALPINGOSTOMY: GOOD PROGNOSTIC FEATURES • small hydrosalpinx • no/minimal peri-tubal adhesions • normal mucosa • normal/thin wall • partial occlusion
Management of distal tubal disease ? Salpingostomy IVF Salpingectomy
Hydrosalpinges and IVF • The live birth rate of patients with hydrosalpinges undergoing IVF is only one-half that of women who do not have hydrosalpinges
Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome : a prospective randomized multicentre trial in Scandinavia on salpingectomy prior to IVFStrandell et al 1999 Human Reprod 14:2762 First IVF cycle, regardless of whether or not hydrosalpinges demonstrable by USS PR, p=0.067 LB, p=0.045
Hydrosalpinges and IVF • Salpingectomy prior to IVF in women with hydrosalpinges improves pregnancy, implantation and live birth rates
1. Is it cost-effective to routinely remove all hydrosalpinges prior to IVF ?
Cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy prior to IVF, based on a RCTStrandell et al 2005 Human Reprod 20:3284 Up to three IVF cycles, in women with hydrosalpinges demonstrable by USS
Cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy prior to IVF, based on a RCTStrandell et al 2005 Human Reprod 20:3284 Up to three IVF cycles, in women with hydrosalpinges demonstrable by USS More cost-effective
1. Is it cost-effective to routinely remove all hydrosalpinges prior to IVF ? Yes
Complications of salpingectomy • Impairment of ovarian blood supply, leading to reduced ovarian response to ovarian stimulation in IVF • Bowel injury
A case of salpingectomy • Large hydrosalpinx visible on ultrasound • One failed IVF treatment • Laparoscopic surgery • Dense adhesions between L tube and bowel and pelvic side wall • 2 hour operation, salpingectomy • Day 3, sepsis, bowel leak • Colostomy, ITU for 1 weeks
Complications of salpingectomy • Impairment of ovarian blood supply, leading to reduced ovarian response to ovarian stimulation in IVF • Bowel injury More likely if there were severe adhesions
Disadvantages of proximal tubal occlusion • Pain may get worse • Risk of recurrent infection and pyosalpinx • May require further surgery to remove the diseased tube at a later date • The data on possible benefit is not as robust as that of salpingectomy
2. Should proximal tubal occlusion replace salpingectomy? Only if there are severe adhesions
3. Should hysteroscopic tubal occlusion replace salpingectomy?
Essure 4 expandedouter coils 1 2 3 4 3-8 expanded outer coils visible in uterinecavity
3. Should hysteroscopic tubal occlusion replace salpingectomy? No, there are concerns about implantation and premature labour
4. Is aspiration of hydrosalpinges fluid as effective as salpingectomy?
Ultrasound-guided hydrosalpinx aspiration, RCTHammadien et al, Human Reprod 2008
4. Is aspiration of hydrosalpinges fluid as effective as salpingectomy? No
5. If the hydrosalpinx is small and not visible on ultrasound, is it still necessary to perform salpingectomy?
Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome : a prospective randomized multicentre trial in Scandinavia on salpingectomy prior to IVFStrandell et al 1999 Human Reprod 14:2762 First IVF cycle, regardless of whether or not hydrosalpinges demonstrable by USS PR, p=0.067 LB, p=0.045
5. If the hydrosalpinx is small and not visible on ultrasound, is it still necessary to perform salpingectomy? Yes
Unilateral Hydrosalpinx with a Contra-lateral Patent TubeMcComb & Taylor 2001 Fertil Steril 76:1279 • 23 women with unilateral hydrosalpinx underwent salpingostomy • IU pregnancy rate 43.5% • Conclusion – unilateral salpingostomy in women with a contra-lateral patent tube improves fertility
Case History • 33 year old woman • one miscarriage at 7 weeks • Infertility for 15 months • Conceived spontaneously, but miscarried again at 8 week gestation • Investigation – L tube normal. R hydrosalpinx, grossly dilated, intraluminal adhesions, salpingectomy. • Three months later, spontaneouslyconception, term delivery
Salpingectomy : Surgical tips 1 Main Risk: devascularization of the ovary • Operate close to the tube, away from ovarian vessels and suspensory ligament