These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Fluoroscopically guided transcervical fallopian tube recanalization of post-sterilization reversal mid-tubal obstructions.
    Author: Houston JG, Anderson D, Mills J, Harrold A.
    Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2000; 23(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 10821889.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To assess the technical success and early outcome of fluoroscopically guided transcervical fallopian tube recanalization (FTR) in mid-tubal occlusion following sterilization reversal surgery. METHODS: From July 1995 to January 1998, patients with greater than 12 months secondary infertility underwent hysterosalpingography (HSG). FTR was performed in proximal or mid-tubal occlusion. Cases of FTR in mid-tubal occlusion were included in this study. Technical success (defined as complete tubal patency) using a standard guidewire and hydrophilic glidewire, the number of patients with at least one patent tube, and the intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates were determined. RESULTS: Twenty-six infertile patients with previous sterilization reversal underwent HSG. Eight of 26 (31%) patients (mean age 32 years, range 23-37 years), had attempted FTR for mid-tubal occlusion at the site of surgical anastomosis. Fourteen tubes were attempted as there were two previous salpingectomies. Technical success was achieved in eight of 14 (57%) tubes attempted, resulting in five of eight (62%) patients having at least one patent tube. At follow-up (mean 18 months, range 12-28 months) in these five patients there was one intrauterine pregnancy. There were no ectopic pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: FTR in mid-tubal obstruction in infertile patients following sterilization reversal surgery is technically feasible and may result in intrauterine pregnancy. In this small group there was a lower technical success rate and lower pregnancy rate than in unselected proximal tubal occlusion.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]