This study sought to answer the following question: What are the complications and assisted reproductive technology outcomes among women with hydrosalpinges managed by hysteroscopic microinsert tubal occlusion compared with women with hydrosalpinges managed by laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy?
This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2009 to December 2014 at two academic, tertiary care, in vitro fertilization centres in Toronto, Ontario. All patients (n = 52) who underwent hysteroscopic tubal occlusion for hydrosalpinges were identified. Patients who proceeded with embryo transfer cycles after hysteroscopic microinsert (n = 33) were further age matched to a cohort of patients who underwent embryo transfer after laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy (n = 33). Main outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate per patient and per embryo transfer cycle.
Among 33 patients, there were 39 fresh and 37 frozen embryo transfer cycles in the hysteroscopic group (group A); among 33 patients in the laparoscopic group (group B), there were 42 fresh and 29 frozen embryo transfer cycles. The cumulative clinical pregnancy rate in group A and group B was similar (66.7% vs. 69.7%, respectively; P = 0.8). The clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer cycle was also similar in both groups (28.9% in group A vs. 32.4% in group B; P = 0.6). There were two incidents of ectopic pregnancy in the laparoscopic group and no ectopic pregnancy in the hysteroscopic group. There were three major complications: tubo-ovarian abscess, distal migration of the coil after microinsert placement, and an acute abdomen following the hysteroscopic procedure.
Pregnancy outcomes after hysteroscopic placement of a microinsert for hydrosalpinx management before embryo transfer were comparable to those following laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy. However, caution is advised regarding microinsert placement for hydrosalpinges before proceeding with assisted reproductive technology.