Salpingectomy at the Time of Cesarean Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the differences in operative time and surgical outcomes between salpingectomy and standard tubal interruption at the time of cesarean delivery. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until July 2019 for articles reporting outcomes for women undergoing salpingectomy during cesarean delivery compared with women undergoing standard sterilization methods. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies were selected if they included the main outcome of operative time or additional outcomes, which included infection, transfusion, readmission, change in hematocrit, and estimated blood loss. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale or Cochrane Handbook were used to assess quality of cohort and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), respectively. A random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled relative risk or weighted mean difference for each outcome with their 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic, and L'Abbé plots were inspected visually to assess for homogeneity. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We identified 11 studies comprising 320,443 women undergoing total salpingectomy or standard sterilization methods at the time of cesarean delivery. Three RCTs and eight retrospective cohort studies were investigated separately by meta-analysis. When compared with standard sterilization methods, total operative time for patients receiving salpingectomy was significantly longer (6.3 minutes, 95% CI 3.5-9.1, seven studies, 7,303 patients) for cohort studies. With the three RCTs of 163 patients, total operative time was not significantly increased in women receiving salpingectomy (8.1 minutes, 95% CI -4.4 to 20.7). The salpingectomy group did not have an increased risk of wound infection, transfusion, readmission, reoperation, internal organ damage, blood loss, change in hemoglobin, or length of stay when compared with standard sterilization methods. CONCLUSION: Salpingectomy at the time of cesarean delivery was associated with a small increase in operative time; however, it was not associated with an increased rate of surgical complications. This option should be considered for patients desiring sterilization during cesarean delivery. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42019145247.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".