Journals / JAREM / 2018 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

Pregnancy Outcomes after Tubal Reanastomosis, 10-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center

Tubal Reanastomoz Sonrası Gebelik Sonuçları, Tersiyer Merkezde 10 Yıllık Deneyim

Journal
JAREM
Pages
79–82
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Compared withinvitro fertilization, there are additional advantages of low cost, high singleton pregnancy rates, low risk of ovarian hyperstimulation, simultaneous intervention with intraoperative coexisting uterine and tubaovarian pathology, and pelvic adhesions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Tubal reanastomosis is not a frequently performed surgical procedure and majorityof the national and international literature is retrospective.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We thus aimed to investigate our pregnancy outcomes after 10 years of experience intubal reanastomosis to contribute to the literature.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Compared withinvitro fertilization, there are additional advantages of low cost, high singleton pregnancy rates, low risk of ovarian hyperstimulation, simultaneous intervention with intraoperative coexisting uterine and tubaovarian pathology, and pelvic adhesions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Tubal reanastomosis is not a frequently performed surgical procedure and majorityof the national and international literature is retrospective. We thus aimed to investigate our pregnancy outcomes after 10 years of experience intubal reanastomosis to contribute to the literature. Methods: We evaluated 68 patients with pregnancy who underwent tubal sterilization in the preliminary stage and who underwent surgery for tubal reanastomosis between January 2007 and January 2017 atour clinic. We excluded16 cases from the study and included 52 cases in the study. Post-operative pregnancy outcomes of the cases were analyzed. Results: The rate of pregnancy after tubal reanastomosis was 53.8% atour clinic. Live birth rates were 32.6%, ectopic pregnancy rate was 9.6%, and abortus rate was 11.5%. Conclusion: Pregnancy outcomes after tubal reanastomosis are particularly good in patients under 40 years of age. Compared withinvitro fertilization, there are additional advantages of low cost, high singleton pregnancy rates, low risk of ovarian hyperstimulation, simultaneous intervention with intraoperative coexisting uterine and tubaovarian pathology, and pelvic adhesions.

Özet

Amaç: Tubal reanastomoz çok sık uygulanan bir cerrahi yöntem değildir. Ulusal ve uluslararası literatürün çoğu retrospektiftir. On yıllık tubal reanastomoz sonrası gebelik sonuçlarımızı araştırıp literatüre katkı sağlamayı amaçladık. Yöntemler: Tubal sterilizasyon yapılan ve sonradan gebelik istemi ile kliniğimizde Ocak 2007 ile Ocak 2017 arasında tubal reanastomoz operasyonu uygulanan 68 olgu değerlendirildi. On altı olgu çalışma dışı bırakılarak 52 olgu çalışmaya dahil edildi. Olguların operasyon sonrası gebelik sonuçları analiz edildi. Bulgular: Tubal reanastomoz sonrası gebelik oranı kliniğimizde %53,8 olarak bulundu. Canlı doğum oranları %32,6, ektopik gebelik %7,7, abortus %13,5 olarak tespit edidi. Sonuç: Tubal reanastomoz sonrası gebelik sonuçları özellikle 40 yaş altı hastalarda oldukça iyidir. İn vitro fertilizasyon ile karşılaştırıldığında düşük maliyeti, yüksek tekil gebelik oranları, düşük overyan hiperstimülasyon riski, intraoperatif olarak eşlik eden uterin ve tubaovaryan patoloji ve pelvik adezyonlara eşzamanlı müdahale imkanı sunması ek avantajlarıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAPÇA, Ö. E., GÜMÜŞBURUN, N., AL, R. A., BÖREKÇİ, B., İNGEÇ, M., KUMTEPE, Y. (2018). Pregnancy Outcomes after Tubal Reanastomosis, 10-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center. JAREM, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 79–82. https://ajindex.com/articles/192759

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Fritz M, Speroff L. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 8. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
  2. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception inthe United States: 1982-2008. Vital Health Stat 2010; 23: 1-44.
  3. Liskin L, Rinehart W, Blackburn R, Rutledg AH. Minilaparatomy and laparoscopy: safe, effective, and widely used. Popul Rep C 1985; C125-67. Wilcox LS, Chu SY, Peterson HB. Characteristics of women who considered or obtained tubal reanastomosis: results from a prospective study of tubal sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75: 661-5. Calvert JP. Reversal of female sterilization. Br J Hosp Med 1995; 53: 267-70.
  4. Curtis KM, Mohllajee AP, Peterson HB. Regret following female sterilization at a young age: A systematic review. Contraception 2006; 73: 205-10. [CrossRef] Gomel V. Tubal reconstruction by microsurgery. Fertil Steril 1977; 28: 59-65. [CrossRef] Sedbon E, Delajolinieres JB, Boudouris O, Madelenat P. Tubal desterilization through exclusive laparoscopy. Hum Reprod 1989; 4: 158- 9. [CrossRef] Wilcox LS, Chu SY, Eaker ED, Zeger SL, Peterson HB. Risk factors for regret aftertubal sterilization: 5 years of follow-up in a prospective study. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 927-33. [CrossRef] Peterson HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM, Wilcox LS, Tylor LR, Trussell J. The risk of-pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1161-8. [CrossRef] Şentürk MB, Budak MŞ, Toğrul C, Tahaoğlu AE, Balsak D, Akgöl S. Tubal Reanastomoz Yapılan Olguların Gebelik Oranları. Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi 2016; 32: 79-82.
  5. Kim JD, Kim SH, Doo JK, Rhyen CH. Areporton 387 cases of microsurgical tubal reversals. Fertil Steril 1997; 68: 875-80. [CrossRef] Dubinston JB, Chapron C. Single suture laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1998; 10: 307-13. [CrossRef] Yavuz A, Akkurt MÖ, Yalçın Y, Tatar B, Karakoç G. Tubal Reanastomoz Sonrası Gebelik Sonuçları. Turkiye Klinikleri J Gynecol Obst 2015; 25: 227-30. [CrossRef] Dubinston JB, Chapron C, Nos C, Morice P,Aubriot FC, Garnier P. Sterilization reversal: fertitity results. Hum Reprod 1995; 10: 1145-51. [CrossRef] Yoon TK, Sung HR, Kang HG, Cha SH, Lee CN, Cha KY. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis:fertility outcome in 202 cases. Fertil Steril 1999; 72: 1121-6. [CrossRef] Cohen MA, Chang PL, Uhler M, Legro R, Sauer MV, Lindheim SR. Reproductive outcome after sterilization reversal in women ofadvanced reproductive age. J Assist Reprod Genet