Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recurrence of hydrosalpinges after cuff neosalpingostomy in a poor prognosis population

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the recurrence rate of hydrosalpinges after cuff neosalpingostomy in poor prognosis candidates.

Methods: Forty consecutive patients with hydrosalpinx treated with cuff neosalpingostomy were included. Main outcome measures were recurrence rate of hydrosalpinx after cuff neosalpingostomy, intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates.

Results: Intraoperatively, the mean size of the hydrosalpinx was 1.9±0.7 cm, and 77% of patients had evidence of pelvic adhesions. Recurrence of hydrosalpinx, whether unilateral or bilateral was 70% (28/40) per patient. Intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates were 5% (2/40) and 2.5% (1/40), with a total pregnancy rate of 7.5% (3/40).

Conclusions: Most patients experience recurrence of hydrosalpinx after cuff neosalpingostomy, thus requiring additional surgery such as salpingectomy prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF). In a poor prognosis population, salpingectomy should be considered as the primary treatment for hydrosalpinx prior to IVF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bahamondes L, Bueno JGR, Hardy E, Vera S, Pimental E, Ramos M. Identification of main risk factors of tubal infertility. Fertil Steril 1984;61:478–82

    Google Scholar 

  2. Katz E, Akman MA, Damewood MD, Garcia JE. Deleterious effect of the presence of hydrosalpinx on implantation and pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1996;66:122–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kassabji M, Sims JA, Butler L, Muasher SJ. Reduced pregnancy outcome in patients with unilateral or bilateral hydrosalpinx after in vitro fertilization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1994;56:129–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Strandell A, Waldenstrom U, Nilsson L, Hamberger L. Hydrosalpinx reduces in-vitro fertilization/embryo transfer pregnancy rates. Hum Reprod 1994;9:861–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mukherjee T, Copperman AB, McCaffrey C, Cook CA, Bustilo M, Obasaju MF. Hydrosalpinx fluid has embryotoxic affects on murine embryogenesis: a case for prophylactic salpingectomy. Fertil Steril 1996;66:851–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Beyler SA, James KP, Fritz MA, Meyer WR. Hydrosalpingeal fluid inhibits in vitro embryonic development in a murine model. Hum Reprod 1997;12:2724–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Meyer WR, Castelbaum AJ, Somkuti S, Sagoskin AW, Doyle M, Harris JE. et al. Hydrosalpinges adversely affect markers of endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod 1997;12:1393–8

    Google Scholar 

  8. Strandell A, Lindhard A, Waldenstrom U, Thornburn J, Janson PO, Hamberger L. Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome: a prospective, randomized multicentre trial in Scandinavia on salpingectomy prior to IVF. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2762–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB. Laparoscopic management of hydrosalpinges before in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: salpingectomy versus proximal tubal occlusion. Fertil Steril 2001;75:612–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Murray DL, Sagoskin AW, Widra EA, Levy MJ. The adverse effect of hydrosalpinges on in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates and the benefit of surgical correction. Fertil Steril 1998;69:41–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Boer-Meisel ME, te Velde ER, Habbema JDF, Kardaun JWPF. Predicting the pregnancy outcome in patients treated for hydrosalpinx: a prospective study. Fertil Steril 1986;45:23–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mage G, Pouly JL, de Joliniere JB, Chabrand S, Riouallon A, Bruhat MA. A preoperative classification to predict the intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates after distal tubal microsurgery. Fertil Steril 1986;46:807–10

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Oh ST. Tubal patency and conception rates with three methods of laparoscopic terminal neosalpingostomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparos 1996;3:519–23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Milingos SD, Kallipolitis GK, Loutradis DC, Liapi AG, Hassan EA, Mavrommatis CG. et al. Laparoscopic treatment of hydrosalpinx: factors affecting pregnancy rate. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparos 2000;7:355–61

    Google Scholar 

  15. Marana R, Rizzi M, Muzii L, Catalano GF, Caruana P, Mancuso S. Correlation between the American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions and distal tubal occlusion, salpingoscopy, and reproductive outcome in tubal surgery. Fertil Steril 1995;64:924–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Canis M, Mage G, Pouly JL, Manhes H, Wattiez A, Bruhat MA. Laparoscopic distal tuboplasty: report of 87 cases and a 4-year experience. Fertil Steril 1991;56:616–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. te Velde ER, Boer-Meisel ME, Meisner J, Schoemaker J, Habbema JDF. The significance of preoperative hysterosalpingogram and laparoscopy for predicting the pregnancy outcome in patients with bilateral hydrosalpinx. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1989;31:33–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Schlaff WD, Hassiakos DK, Damewood MD, Rock JA. Neosalpingostomy for distal tubal obstruction: prognostic factors and impact of surgical technique. Fertil Steril 1990;54:984–90

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Donnez J, Casanas-Roux F. Prognostic factors of fimbrial microsurgery. Fertil Steril 1986;46:200–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zeyneloglu HB, Arici A, Olive DL. Adverse effects of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1998;70:492–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wainer R, Camus E, Camier B, Martin C, Vasseur C, Merlet F. Does hydrosalpinx reduce the pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril 1997;68:1022–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. The practice committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Salpingectomy for hydrosalpinx prior to in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2004;82:S117–9

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gomel V. Salpingo-ovariolysis by laparoscopy in infertility. Fertil Steril 1983;40:607–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Vasquez G, Boeckx W, Brosens I. Prospective study of tubal mucosal lesions and fertility in hydrosalpinges. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1075–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Chong AP. Pregnancy outcome in neosalpingostomy by the cuff vs. Bruhat technique using the carbon dioxide laser. J Gynecol Surg 1991;7:207–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Dubuisson JB, de Joliniere JB, Aubriot FX, Darai E, Foulot H, Mandelbrot L. Terminal tuboplasties by laparoscopy: 65 consecutive cases. Fertil Steril 1990;54:401–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kitchin JD, Nunley WC, Bateman BG. Surgical management of distal tubal occlusion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;155:524–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kosasa TS, Hale RW. Treatment of hydrosalpinx using a single incision eversion procedure. Int J Fertil 1988;33:319–23

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kodaman PH, Arici A, Seli E. Evidence based diagnosis and management of tubal factor infertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2004;16:221–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California-Keck School of Medicine, Women’s and Children’s Hospital, 1240 N Mission Road, Room 8K9, Los Angeles, 90033, CA, USA

    Aykut Bayrak, Djana Harp, Peyman Saadat, Eliran Mor & Richard J. Paulson

  2. 425 Fifth Avenue, Third Floor, New York, 10016, NY, USA

    Aykut Bayrak

Authors
  1. Aykut Bayrak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Djana Harp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peyman Saadat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eliran Mor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Richard J. Paulson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aykut Bayrak.

Additional information

Presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, October 11–15, 2003, San Antonio, Texas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bayrak, A., Harp, D., Saadat, P. et al. Recurrence of hydrosalpinges after cuff neosalpingostomy in a poor prognosis population. J Assist Reprod Genet 23, 285–288 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-006-9050-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-006-9050-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation