Fertility outcome of Laparoscopic Tubal Reanastomosis.
- Author:
Wee Hyun LEE
;
Sun Hee CHA
;
Mee Hwa LEE
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Tubal Reanastomosis;
Laparoscopy;
Laparotomy
- MeSH:
Female;
Fertility*;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hospitals, General;
Humans;
Laparoscopy;
Laparotomy;
Length of Stay;
Pain, Postoperative;
Pregnancy;
Pregnancy Outcome;
Pregnancy Rate;
Retrospective Studies;
Sterilization;
Sterilization Reversal*
- From:Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
1999;42(3):487-490
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to evaluate the pregnancy outcome and the advantages of laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis. METHOD: During 16 months, January 1996 to April 1997, thirty-two patient had underwent laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis in Pudang CHA General Hospital. The mean age of the patients was 36.1+/-4.3 years(mean+/-SD; range 26 to 47 years). RESULT: The intrauterine pregnancy rate of laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis was 72.4%(21/29). Data comparing laparoscopic procedure retrospectively to tubal reversal by laparotomy was also evaluated. The mean interval from operation to pregnancy was similar in the two groups (p=0.9). The operation time was sigoificantly longer for laparoscopy (215.3+/-35.5 minutes) than for laparotomy(159.7+/-52.3 minutes). Nevertheless, the intensity of postoperative pain was lower (p<0.05) in patient who underwent laparoscopy than in patient who underwent laparotomy. Also, the mean hospital stay (3.6+/-2.3 days for laparoscopy, 6.1+/-0.5 days for laparotomy) was shortened(p<0.05) after laparoscopy compared with laparotomy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis may offer the benefits of lower postoperative pain and shorten recovery time in comparison with laparotomy. Therefore, considering the high pregnancy rate in minimal follow up period of 6 month, laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis could be an alternative procedure to microsurgical laparotomy in patients requesting reversal of sterilization.
