Zentralblatt fur Gynakologie · 2000
[Prognostic value of Fallopian tube endoscopy].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schmidt S, Weidner A, Sierra F, Krebs D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Progress in sterility-therapy demands diagnostic methods, that ensure the right indication for certain therapies in order to avoid unsuccessful attempts. In this retrospective study we tried to find out, whether we could predict and influence the success rate of therapies with the use of falloposcopy prior to further treatment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 62 sterile patients the endotubal state was evaluated with a falloposcope (Imagyn, Irvine, USA), a system of linear everting catheter (LEC) and microendoscope, prior to further treatment.
RESULTS: Twenty of the 62 patients had endotubal pathology of both tubes, 15 patients showed pathology of one tube and 25 patients were diagnosed to have a normal endotubal morphology. In 2 patients falloposcopy could not be performed because of blockage due to intramural myomas. Pregnancy rate of those patients with a normal endosalpinx was 52% altogether, following microsurgery 80% and following insemination even 100%. No extrauterine pregnancies were described in this group. Pregnancy rate of those patients with endotubal pathology of both tubes was 35%. In this group no pregnancy followed microsurgery and following insemination one extrauterine pregnancy could be noticed. Furthermore, IVF results were improved if morphologic evaluation showed normal mucosa.
CONCLUSIONS: The falloposcopy is a helpful diagnostic procedure to evaluate endotubal pathology prior to microsurgery and insemination.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 62 sterile patients the endotubal state was evaluated with a falloposcope (Imagyn, Irvine, USA), a system of linear everting catheter (LEC) and microendoscope, prior to further treatment.
RESULTS: Twenty of the 62 patients had endotubal pathology of both tubes, 15 patients showed pathology of one tube and 25 patients were diagnosed to have a normal endotubal morphology. In 2 patients falloposcopy could not be performed because of blockage due to intramural myomas. Pregnancy rate of those patients with a normal endosalpinx was 52% altogether, following microsurgery 80% and following insemination even 100%. No extrauterine pregnancies were described in this group. Pregnancy rate of those patients with endotubal pathology of both tubes was 35%. In this group no pregnancy followed microsurgery and following insemination one extrauterine pregnancy could be noticed. Furthermore, IVF results were improved if morphologic evaluation showed normal mucosa.
CONCLUSIONS: The falloposcopy is a helpful diagnostic procedure to evaluate endotubal pathology prior to microsurgery and insemination.