Fertility and sterility · 1995
Hysteroscopic cannulation for proximal tubal obstruction: a change for the better?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Das K, Nagel T C, Malo J W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare overall the results of hysteroscopic tubal cannulations and resection anastomosis for proximal tubal occlusion.
DESIGN: Nonrandomized retrospective analysis of patients operated on by two surgeons.
SETTING: University and large tertiary referral private practice.
PATIENTS: Seventy-four patients over a 10-year period, with bilateral or unilateral proximal occlusion of a single tube.
INTERVENTIONS: Hysteroscopic cannulation, resection anastomosis, or both.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates, long-term tubal patency, and pathology of tubal segments.
RESULTS: In patients with normal distal tubes, intrauterine pregnancy rates were similar (12/21, 57% versus 12/24, 50%) and ectopic pregnancy rates were lower (0/21, 0% versus 7/24, 29.1%) in the cannulation group. One-year patency rates in nonpregnant patients was higher in the anastomosis group (12/15, 80% versus 3/8, 33%).
CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopic cannulation should be first choice in the management of proximal tubal obstructions in selected patients. It may be a treatment option for delayed occlusion after successful cannulation or resection anastomosis.
DESIGN: Nonrandomized retrospective analysis of patients operated on by two surgeons.
SETTING: University and large tertiary referral private practice.
PATIENTS: Seventy-four patients over a 10-year period, with bilateral or unilateral proximal occlusion of a single tube.
INTERVENTIONS: Hysteroscopic cannulation, resection anastomosis, or both.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates, long-term tubal patency, and pathology of tubal segments.
RESULTS: In patients with normal distal tubes, intrauterine pregnancy rates were similar (12/21, 57% versus 12/24, 50%) and ectopic pregnancy rates were lower (0/21, 0% versus 7/24, 29.1%) in the cannulation group. One-year patency rates in nonpregnant patients was higher in the anastomosis group (12/15, 80% versus 3/8, 33%).
CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopic cannulation should be first choice in the management of proximal tubal obstructions in selected patients. It may be a treatment option for delayed occlusion after successful cannulation or resection anastomosis.