Salpingostomy in the treatment of hydrosalpinx: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY QUESTION: What is the chance of natural conception when salpingostomy is used to treat hydrosalpinx?. SUMMARY ANSWER: The natural clinical pregnancy rate following salpingostomy is 27%, in the hands of experienced surgeons who publish their results. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Tubal surgery is not commonly offered for women with hydrosalpinges since the advent of assisted conception treatment. This is the first systematic review to investigate natural conception rates following salpingostomy in the treatment of hydrosalpinx. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 observational studies encompasses 2810 patients undergoing salpingostomy and attempting natural conception. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Literature searches were conducted to retrieve observational studies which reported salpingostomy for hydrosalpinx. Databases searched included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAHL, with no language restriction. Only studies that focused on salpingostomy (rather than other tubal conserving surgeries) for the treatment of hydrosalpinx were included. A total of 22 studies matched the inclusion criteria. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The pooled natural clinical pregnancy rate from the 22 observational studies (including 2810 patients) was 27% (95% confidence interval (CI): 25-29%) after salpingostomy was performed for hydrosalpinx. The cumulative clinical pregnancy rates were 8.7% (95% CI: 6.6-11.5%) at 6 months, 13.3% (95% CI: 10.6-16.7%) at 9 months, 20.0% (95% CI: 17.5-22.8%) at 12 months, 21.2% (95% CI: 18.6-24.1%) at 18 months and 25.5% (95% CI: 22.2-29.4%) at 24 months after salpingostomy. The pooled live birth rate (10 studies, 1469 patients) was 25% (95% CI: 22-28%) after salpingostomy was performed for hydrosalpinx. The pooled ectopic pregnancy rate (19 studies, 2662 patients) was 10% (95% CI: 9-11%). The pooled miscarriage rate (seven studies, 924 patients) was 7% (95% CI: 6-9%). The included studies scored well on the Newcastle Ottawa quality assessment scale. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Strict inclusion criteria were used in the conduct of the systematic review. However, the studies included are clinically heterogeneous in many aspects including patient characteristics, surgical technique and duration of follow-up after salpingostomy. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings of this systematic review suggest that salpingostomy is an alternative treatment strategy to tubal clipping or salpingectomy in patients presenting to fertility services with hydrosalpinx. Further prospective, large and high quality studies are needed to identify the subpopulation that would most benefit from tube conserving surgery. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: No external funding was either sought or obtained for this study. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».