Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing IVF-ET: a randomized controlled trial

BMC Women's Health

Research Article

Usama M Fouda¹  Hatem I Abdelmoty¹  Ahmed M Sayed¹  Khaled A Elsetohy¹ 

[1] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt;

关键词: Hydrosalpinx;    Salpingectomy;    IVF-ET;    Infertility;    Ultrasound;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12905-015-0177-2

 received in 2014-07-14, accepted in 2015-02-04,  发布年份 2015

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid at the time of oocyte retrieval with salpingectomy in the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing IVF-ET.MethodsOne hundred and sixty patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx were randomized into salpingectomy group and aspiration group using computer generated randomization list and sequentially numbered sealed envelopes containing allocation information written on a card.ResultsThe clinical pregnancy rate per started cycle and the implantation rate were non- significantly higher in the salpingectomy group compared with the aspiration group [40% vs. 27.5% (p value = 0.132) and 18.95% vs. 12.82% (p value =0.124), respectively]. In the aspiration group, 34.21% of patients had rapid re-accumulation of the hydrosalpinx fluid (i.e. within first two weeks after embryo transfer). Whereas, the clinical pregnancy rate per transfer cycle and the implantation rate were significantly higher in salpingectomy group compared with the subgroup of patients with rapid re-accumulation of hydrosalpinx fluid [42.67% vs. 19.23% (p value = 0.036) and 18.95% vs. 7.58% (p value = 0.032), respectively], no significant differences were detected between the salpingectomy group and the subgroup of patients with no re-accumulation of hydrosalpinx fluid (42.67% vs. 34% (p value = 0.356) and 18.95% vs. 15.5% (p value = 0.457), respectively).ConclusionThe small sample size could be the cause of failure of detecting significant increase in implantation and pregnancy rates in salpingectomy group compared with aspiration group. Further larger randomized controlled trials are needed to determine whether salpingectomy is more effective than aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid or not. Moreover, the data presented in this study suggested that rapid re-accumulation of hydrosalpinx fluid is an obstacle against successful implantation and the cause of lower success rate with ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid compared with salpingectomy.Trial registrationClinical trials.gov (NCT02008240), registered 8 December 2013.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Fouda et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015