Laparoscopic management of hydrosalpinges before in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: salpingectomy versus proximal tubal occlusion.Fertil Steril. 2001 Mar; 75(3):612-7.FS
To compare ovarian response and IVF-ET cycle outcome in patients with hydrosalpinges managed by either laparoscopic salpingectomy or proximal tubal occlusion.
Tertiary-care assisted reproductive technology program.
One hundred four consecutive fresh IVF-ET cycles in 94 patients with tubal-factor infertility.
Laparoscopic salpingectomy (group 1: 35 cycles) or bipolar proximal tubal occlusion (group 2: 17 cycles), controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, and IVF-ET. Control groups consisted of both tubal-factor patients without hydrosalpinges (group 3: 37 cycles) and those with prior bilateral tubal ligation for sterilization (group 4: 15 cycles).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)
Uterine artery Doppler flow, controlled ovarian hyperstimulation response, and implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.
There were no differences in mean uterine artery pulsatility indices or ovarian response among any of the groups. A trend toward a higher cycle cancellation rate in group 1 did not approach statistical significance. Clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were not significantly different between group 1 (57.1%, 29.2 +/- 5.9%, respectively) and group 2 (46.7%, 19.4 +/- 6.1%, respectively) or compared with those of controls.
 Management of hydrosalpinges by laparoscopic salpingectomy or bipolar proximal tubal occlusion yielded statistically similar responses to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and IVF-ET cycle outcome.  The latter approach may be preferable in patients who present with dense pelvic adhesions and easy access only to the proximal fallopian tube.