Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology (CEOG) is published by IMR Press from Volume 47 Issue 1 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher on a subscription basis, and they are hosted by IMR Press on imrpress.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with S.O.G.
Microsurgery versus laparoscopy in distal tubal obstruction hysterosalpingographically or laparoscopically investigated
Objective: To compare pregnancy rates after laparotomic microsurgical or laparoscopic distal tuboplasty. Design: Two hundred and twenty-four women with infertility due to distal tubal occlusion were randomized to be treated with either laparotomy or laparoscopy from 1987 to 2001 at the lnstitute of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University of Rome, “La Sapienza”. Results: The results were evaluated taking into account the type of surgical approach, the severity of tubal damage and of adhesions. After a 24-month follow-up period, the overall pregnancy rate obtained with microsurgery was 43.7%, of which 33.3% were term pregnancies, 5.0% abortions, and 5.0% ectopic pregnancies. After laparoscopy, the overall pregnancy rate was 41.6%, of which 29. l % were term pregnancies, 8.3% abortions and 3.9% ectopic pregnancies. No significant differences was observed between the two groups in terms of fertility rate (chi-square 0.016, p = 0.9003). Conclusions: Laparotomy plus microsurgery and laparoscopy were equally effective in restoring fertility in women with comparable tubal damage. The severity of the damage is a critical factor for the results.