• Users Online: 183
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

 
Table of Contents
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 118-122

Effect of recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation on the outcome of in vitro fertilization treatment: A retrospective cohort study


1 Department of Reproductive Medicine, People's Hospital of Rizhao, Jinan, China
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine; Center for Reproductive Medicine, Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education; Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Jinan, China
3 Center for Reproductive Medicine, Changle People's Hospital, Changle, China
4 Center for Reproductive Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China

Date of Submission02-May-2019
Date of Decision11-Feb-2020
Date of Acceptance16-Mar-2020
Date of Web Publication1-Aug-2020

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Lei Yan
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan 250001
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_27_19

Get Permissions

  Abstract 


Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of recurrent hydrosalpinx after proximal tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment.
Materials and Methods: Seven hundred and twenty-six patients with hydrosalpinx undergoing laparoscopic surgery before IVF were enrolled in the study. Five hundred and sixty-two patients treated with proximal tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy were included in Group A. One hundred and sixty-four cases managed with salpingectomy were grouped into Group B. Group A were further divided into two subgroups. One hundred and forty-six patients in Group A1 had a recurrence of hydrosalpinx. Four hundred and sixteen patients in Group A2 had no repetition of hydrosalpinx. We compared the pregnancy outcomes of their subsequent fresh embryo transfer cycles among the three groups.
Results: There were no significant differences among the three groups in terms of age, body mass index (23.56 ± 3.27 vs. 23.13 ± 3.42 vs. 23.63 ± 3.73, P = 0.195), basal hormone level (7.03 ± 1.75 vs. 7.08 ± 2.26 vs. 7.44 ± 2.93, P = 0.195), antral follicle count (12.25 ± 5.92 vs. 12.63 ± 5.71 vs. 11.70 ± 4.98, P = 0.188), duration of gonadotropin (Gn) (11.19 ± 2.1 vs. 10.93 ± 1.84 vs. 10.79 ± 2.03, P = 0.182), consumption of Gn (2136.73 ± 855.65 vs. 1997.15 ± 724.72 vs. 2069.05±765.12 , P = 0.14), endometrial thickness (1.1 ± 0.27 vs. 1.1 ± 0.24 vs. 1.1 ± 0.17, P = 0.352), base follicle-stimulating hormone (6.21 ± 3.43 vs. 6.52 ± 3.20 vs. 5.89 ± 3.10, P = 0.1), number of embryos transferred (1.87 ± 0.36 vs. 1.83 ± 0.42 vs. 1.88 ± 0.37, P = 0.224), and number of high-grade embryos (3.77 ± 2.42 vs. 4.01 ± 2.72 vs. 4.17 ± 2.74, P = 0.41). No differences were detected in clinical pregnancy rate (50% vs. 54.8% vs. 50%, P = 0.439), the live birth rate (86.3% vs. 82.0% vs. 87.8%, P = 0.398), fertilization rate (64.1% vs. 64.4% vs. 64.7%, P = 0.928), and biochemical pregnancy rate (4% vs. 4.5% vs. 7%, P = 0.332) among the three groups.
Conclusion: The recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation does not affect the outcomes of IVF/ICSI. It is not necessary to worry about the effect of recurrent hydrosalpinx on pregnancy outcomes of IVF/ICSI that may due to the spread of inflammation through lymphatic circulation or blood circulation.

Keywords: Hydrosalpinx, in vitro fertilization, infertility, pregnancy outcome, tubal ligation


How to cite this article:
Liu H, Yao Z, Zhang R, Wu S, Lv S, Yan L. Effect of recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation on the outcome of in vitro fertilization treatment: A retrospective cohort study. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther 2020;9:118-22

How to cite this URL:
Liu H, Yao Z, Zhang R, Wu S, Lv S, Yan L. Effect of recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation on the outcome of in vitro fertilization treatment: A retrospective cohort study. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther [serial online] 2020 [cited 2020 Sep 30];9:118-22. Available from: http://www.e-gmit.com/text.asp?2020/9/3/118/291260




  Introduction Top


In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF/ET) was first used to treat an infertile woman with tubal infertility.[1] Hydrosalpinx has a significantly adverse effect on IVF-ET pregnancy outcomes,[2],[3],[4] which could be reduced by half.[5] The main mechanism is that hydrosalpinx may flow back into the uterine cavity, which has embryotoxicity and affect endometrial receptivity.[6],[7],[8] Salpingectomy, tubal ligation, and proximal tubal occlusion are effective treatments to prevent or reduce reflux of inflammatory secretion into the endometrium.[9],[10],[11],[12] However, the recurrence of hydrosalpinx could frequently occur after distal salpingostomy.

Whether the recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation could still cause a detrimental effect on the IVF outcomes via the inflammation spread through lymphatic circulation or blood circulation. Till now, there is no literature on this issue. For women with recurrent hydrosalpinx after surgery during IVF, we informed them that previous studies have shown that proximal tubal occlusion and salpingectomy had a similar effect on subsequent IVF outcomes,[12] but we do not know the recurrence of hydrosalpinx whether have an influence on IVF outcomes or not. In this study, we will discuss the effects of recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation on the pregnancy outcomes of IVF-ET.


  Materials and Methods Top


We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with hydrosalpinx who initiated treatment with proximal tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy (Group A) or salpingectomy (Group B) between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. The protocol of this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, number 2017-5. We have obtained consent from the patients to use their data. Patients in Group A with a recurrence of hydrosalpinx were classified into two subgroups: Group A1 and Group A2. Group A1 had recurrence of hydrosalpinx diagnosed by transvaginal ultrasound, while Group A2 had no repetition of hydrosalpinx.

The inclusion criteria included (1) women aged ≥21 and ≤43 years and (2) all women were undergoing theirfirst fresh ET cycle of IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The exclusion criteria include (1) women who had ovarian tumor history and (2) the chromosomal examination was abnormal.

Hydrosalpinx could be diagnosed using hysterosalpingography or ultrasonography as the fluid-filled elongated and distended tubes. The diagnosis was further confirmed by laparoscopy before IVF treatment. Definition of postoperative recurrence of hydrosalpinx was that the new appearance of sausages or beaded sample liquid dark spacer on the adnexal area but outside the ovaries according to the vaginal ultrasound imaging during the controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) program.[13]

COH and oocyte retrieval were performed according to the routine protocols of our hospital.[14] Outcomes measured included the fertilization rate, live birth rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate (calculated as defined in our previous articles).[15]

Data were expressed as the means ± standard deviation. The normally distributed data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. The statistical test to analyze the reproductive outcomes was done using Chi-square analysis.SPSS version 22.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) for windows was used for statistical analysis.. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. CRESS version 1.3 (Huitong medical, nanjing, 2016, China) was used for sample size calculation, and the sample size was calculated setting the Type I and Type II errors at 0.05 and 0.20, respectively. The pregnancy rate in hydrosalpinx patients was usually reduced by half. Based on the literature and combined with the actual situation of our hospital, we supposed the clinical pregnancy rate of patients without hydrosalpinx was 46%.[5] On these bases, we estimated that the number of patients to be enrolled was about 74 women per group.


  Results Top


Seven hundred and twenty-six cases were reviewed. There were 562 patients with tubal ligation in Group A, who were further classified into two subgroups. One forty six patients with recurrence of hydrosalpinx were divided into Group A1 and 416 patients with no recurrence of hydrosalpinx were divided into Group A2. One hundred and sixty-four cases with salpingectomy were included in Group B [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Study flowcharts. Accrual of the study patients. Women were enrolled in the study and divided into three groups

Click here to view


Baseline characteristics of the three groups are shown in [Table 1]. No significant differences were detected in age (31.82 ± 4.89 vs. 31.90 ± 4.77 vs. 31.85 ± 4.56, P = 0.985), body mass index (23.56 ± 3.27 vs. 23.13 ± 3.42 vs. 23.63 ± 3.73, P = 0.195), and basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (7.03 ± 1.75 vs. 7.08 ± 2.26 vs. 7.44 ± 2.93, P = 0.195) among the three groups. The number of basal follicular both on the left ovarian and right ovarian and antral follicle count (AFC) in Group A showed a trend toward higher than Group B, but the differences were not statistically significant (12.25 ± 5.92 vs. 12.63 ± 5.71 vs. 11.70 ± 4.98, P = 0.188).
Table 1: Comparison of in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection - embryo transfer general clinical data for three groups of patients

Click here to view


The outcomes of the ovarian stimulation and IVF/ICSI outcomes are shown in [Table 2]. There were no significant differences in any of the listed ovarian response parameters and embryological parameters among the three groups.
Table 2: Comparison of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation characteristics among three groups

Click here to view


[Table 3] presents the main outcomes of the IVF/ICSI treatment cycles undertaken by the three groups. There were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rate (50% vs. 54.8% vs. 50%, P = 0.439), live birth rate (86.3% vs. 82.0% vs. 87.8%, P = 0.398), abortion rate (9.5% vs. 14.5% vs. 9.7%, P = 0.380), fertilization rate (64.1% vs. 64.4% vs. 64.7%, P = 0.928), ectopic pregnancy rate (5.4% vs. 3.07% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.530), and biochemical pregnancy rate (4% vs. 4.5% vs. 7%, P = 0.332) among the three groups.
Table 3: Comparison of pregnancy outcomes among three groups

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


The aim of the tubal occlusion combined with the opening of the tube distal is to prevent reflux of inflammatory secretion into the uterine cavity, which is believed to be toxic to the embryo and prevent its implantation. Tubal occlusion and opening of the tube distal end can prevent or reduce reflux of inflammatory secretion into the uterine cavity. This study suggests that after proximal tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy, the recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation had no adverse effect on the main outcomes of following fresh ET during IVF treatment.

It was reported that proximal tubal ligation and salpingectomy have a similar benefit to the clinical pregnancy rate of IVF-ET.[16] The bilateral proximal tubal occlusion may be preferable in patients with severe pelvic adhesions and easy access to the proximal  Fallopian tube More Details.[17] Under the condition of serious complications, bilateral proximal tubal ligation represents a less invasive approach that requires less surgical dissection and operating time while still eliminating retrograde flow of hydrosalpingeal fluid into the endometrial cavity. It also solves the central problem of Fallopian tube water from hydrosalpinx reflux to the uterine cavity. Another advantage is that it does not affect the ovarian blood supply. However, tubal ligation does not entirely remove the lesion, which may lead to the persistence of inflammation, and pelvic pain may occur.

The salpingectomy removes the chronic infection entirely and restoring the anatomical location of the pelvic cavity, making the oocyte retrieval process more safely. However, if the patients had severe pelvic adhesion, the abdominal and pelvic viscera may easily be damaged when performing a salpingectomy. Furthermore, salpingectomy may reduce ovarian function. Gelbaya et al. demonstrated that the retrieved oocytes and basal follicular number in salpingectomy group were reduced compared with the control group.[18] In our study, the basal serum FSH level of salpingectomy group was slightly higher than the tubal ligation group, and the AFC of salpingectomy group was slightly lower than the tubal ligation group. However, these differences were not statistically significant. These slight differences may be due to the affect of ovarian blood supply by salpingectomy. No significant differences were observed in clinical pregnancy rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, live birth rate, and fertilization rate between the three groups.

The direct toxic effect of hydrosalpinx on the embryo and the deficiency receptivity of nutrition affect the development of embryos.[19],[20] The regurgitation of fluid to the uterine cavity can change the endometrial receptivity and mechanical scour endometrium.[21] This mechanism may cause a detrimental effect on IVF outcomes when the hydrosalpinx relapses even after tubal ligation. Hysteroscopic tubal occlusion can effectively prevent the fluid flow back to the uterine cavity and benefit subsequent implantation in the course of assisted reproduction without significant complications,[10] although the randomized controlled trial studies have confirmed the efficacy of tubal embolization,[11] but the clinical pregnancy rate was lower than that of laparoscopic ligation group under hysteroscopy.[12] Tubal embolization has the same principle as tubal ligation and blocks hydrops reflux; theoretically, chronic inflammation factors can affect the endometrium receptivity through blood circulation or lymph circulation, increased risk of miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy. From the results of our study, we only saw a trend toward lower clinical pregnancy rate and higher ectopic pregnancy rate in the recurrence group than the no recurrence group but with no statistical difference. Hence, even if there is a recurrence of hydrosalpinx for patients who have undergone tubal ligation, there are slight adverse effects on IVF outcome and are suspected to be negligible.

Bao reported that patients who underwent proximal tubal occlusion before IVF implantation, the clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy rate significantly increased compared with those with no surgical intervention.[10] The expressions of human endometrial leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) and integrins αvβ3 on the endometrium of the patients with hydrosalpinx were decreased.[22] However, there is no fundamental research on whether there is still an adverse effect on endometrial tolerance for the hydrosalpinx that has ligated. Further confirmation of our study might also be made by the following basic research. At the same time, no record of acute pelvic inflammatory or severe pelvic pain after tubal ligation was reported, proving that it was a safe, effective, and efficient operation method to carry out proximal tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy for the patients with hydrosalpinx before IVF treatment. Especially for patients with poor ovarian function or severe pelvic adhesion, it is a tough decision to perform salpingectomy. Tubal ligation and distal salpingostomy may be an appropriate choice. However, it requires a continuous and in-depth study to verify the long-term effects, especially the impact on the incidence of ovarian cancer.

Our study has the following strengths. First, the 726 patients make our study one of the largest reported sample sizes. Second, whether the recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation could still cause a detrimental effect on IVF outcomes. Till now, there is no literature reporting on this issue. The limitations of our study are as follows. First, this is a retrospective study. The sample selection might exist bias and data were collected from one reproductive center. Second, postoperative recurrence of hydrosalpinx was diagnosed by a vaginal ultrasound scan. However, ultrasound can only indicate irregular and anechoic areas outside of the ovarian and cannot confirm with the recurrence of hydrosalpinx. Transvaginal ultrasound scanning may be helpful, and its sensitivity is up to 85%.[13] The best marker of tubal inflammatory disease was the presence of an incomplete septum of the tubal wall, but there are false-positive examples.[23]


  Conclusion Top


Recurrence of hydrosalpinx after tubal ligation had no adverse effects on the pregnancy outcomes of IVF compared with no recurrence group and salpingectomy group. It is not necessary to worry about the effect of recurrent hydrosalpinx on pregnancy outcomes due to the possible inflammation spread through lymphatic circulation or blood circulation. For the patients with severe pelvic adhesion or decreased ovarian function, proximal tubal occlusion and distal salpingostomy is an effective way to prevent the adverse effect of hydrosalpinges.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1001000), Medical Science and Technology Development Plans of Shandong Province (2016WS0369), and Projects of Medical and Health Technology Program in Shandong Province (201401).

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Infections, pregnancies, and infertility: Perspectives on prevention. World Health Organization. Fertil Steril 1987;47:964-8.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Katz E, Akman MA, Damewood MD, García JE. Deleterious effect of the presence of hydrosalpinx on implantation and pregnancy rates within vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1996;66:122-5.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Kassabji M, Sims JA, Butler L, Muasher SJ. Reduced pregnancy outcome in patients with unilateral or bilateral hydrosalpinx afterin vitro fertilization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1994;56:129-32.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Ng EH, Yeung WS, Ho PC. The presence of hydrosalpinx may not adversely affect the implantation and pregnancy rates inin vitro fertilization treatment. J Assist Reprod Genet 1997;14:508-12.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Zeyneloglu HB, Arici A, Olive DL. Adverse effects of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy rates afterin vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1998;70:492-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Bedaiwy MA, Falcone T, Goldberg JM, Attaran M, Sharma R, Miller K, et al. Relationship between cytokines and the embryotoxicity of hydrosalpingeal fluid. J Assist Reprod Genet 2005;22:161-5.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Zhong Y, Li J, Wu H, Ying Y, Liu Y, Zhou C, et al. Surgical treatment for hydrosalpinx increases the expression of integrin αvβ3 in the endometrium during the implantation window. Exp Ther Med 2012;4:415-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Cheng F, Li T, Wang QL, Zhou HL, Duan L, Cai X. Effects of hydrosalpinx on ultrasonographic parameters for endometrial receptivity during the window of implantation measured by power color doppler ultrasound. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015;8:6103-8.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Déchaud H, Daurès JP, Arnal F, Humeau C, Hédon B. Does previous salpingectomy improve implantation and pregnancy rates in patients with severe tubal factor infertility who are undergoingin vitro fertilization? A pilot prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril 1998;69:1020-5.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Bao HC, Wang MM, Wang XR, Wang WJ, Hao CF. Clinical application of operative hysteroscopy in treatment of complex hydrosalpinx prior to IVF. Iran J Reprod Med 2015;13:311-6.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Kontoravdis A, Makrakis E, Pantos K, Botsis D, Deligeoroglou E, Creatsas G. Proximal tubal occlusion and salpingectomy result in similar improvement inin vitro fertilization outcome in patients with hydrosalpinx. Fertil Steril 2006;86:1642-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Ozgur K, Bulut H, Berkkanoglu M, Coetzee K, Kaya G. ICSI pregnancy outcomes following hysteroscopic placement of essure devices for hydrosalpinx in laparoscopic contraindicated patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;29:113-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Terzić M, Kocijancić D. Pelvic inflammatory disease: Contemporary diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Srp Arh Celok Lek 2010;138:658-63.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Wei D, Sun Y, Liu J, Liang X, Zhu Y, Shi Y, et al. Live birth after fresh versus frozen single blastocyst transfer (Frefro-blastocyst): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2017;18:253.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Chen ZJ, Shi Y, Sun Y, Zhang B, Liang X, Cao Y, et al. Fresh versus frozen embryos for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2016;375:523-33.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Sharif K, Kaufmann S, Sharma V. Heterotopic pregnancy obtained after in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer following bilateral total salpingectomy: Case report. Hum Reprod 1994;9:1966-7.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB. Laparoscopic management of hydrosalpinges beforein vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: Salpingectomy versus proximal tubal occlusion. Fertil Steril 2001;75:612-7.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG, Fitzgerald CT, Horne G, Brison DR, Lieberman BA. Ovarian response to gonadotropins after laparoscopic salpingectomy or the division of fallopian tubes for hydrosalpinges. Fertil Steril 2006;85:1464-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Mukherjee T, Copperman AB, McCaffrey C, Cook CA, Bustillo M, Obasaju MF. Hydrosalpinx fluid has embryotoxic effects on murine embryogenesis: A case for prophylactic salpingectomy. Fertil Steril 1996;66:851-3.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Roberts JE, Clarke HJ, Tulandi T, Tan SL. Effects of hydrosalpingeal fluid on murine embryo development and implantation. J Assist Reprod Genet 1999;16:421-4.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Mansour RT, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI, Riad R. Fluid accumulation of the uterine cavity before embryo transfer: A possible hindrance for implantation. J In vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1991;8:157-9.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Yang J, Wang YQ. Assessment of effections of hydrosalpinx and its treatment on embryo implantation. Chin J Reprod Contracept 2014;34:584-9.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Timor-Tritsch IE, Lerner JP, Monteagudo A, Murphy KE, Heller DS. Transvaginal sonographic markers of tubal inflammatory disease. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998;12:56-66.  Back to cited text no. 23
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed481    
    Printed27    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded82    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal