Academic literature on the topic 'Salpingotomie'

Research purpose: to increase the efficiency of endosurgical treatment of women with progressive tubal pregnancy. Research method: prospective analysis. Research subjects: in 75 female patients, to whom salpingotomy and salpingorrhaphy had been per-formed, tubal patency was found; in 10% - tubal patency was laboured; in 9,5% of patients there was an obstruction. In 52,9% of women, to whom salpingotomic orifice was not sutured, tubal patency was found; in 32,4% of patients tubal patency was disturbed; in 14,7% the fallopian tube was obstructed and in 17,6% of patients tubo-peritoneal fistula formed. Uterine pregnancy rate of salpingotomy and salpingorrhaphy - 34,1%, of women, to whom salpingotomic orifice was not sutured - 20,6%. Performance of endoscopic salpingotomy with suture of the defect at isthmial and ampullar location of the fetal ovum helps to increase the efficien-cy of surgical treatment of the ectopic pregnancy.

Abstract Introduction Tubal pregnancy is the most clinically relevant form of ectopic pregnancy. Surgery consisting of laparoscopic salpingotomy is the therapeutic gold standard. This study looked at risk factors for non-tube-preserving surgery. The aim was to determine a cut-off value for beta-hCG levels, which could be used to predict the extent of tubal surgery. Materials and Method 97 patients with tubal pregnancy who underwent primary salpingotomy in the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of Jena University Hospital between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. A prior medical history of risk factors such as adnexitis, ectopic pregnancy, tubal surgery, treatment for infertility and intrauterine pessary was included in the analysis. The study population was divided into two subgroups: (1) a group which underwent laparoscopic linear salpingotomy, and (2) a group which had laparoscopic partial tubal resection or salpingectomy. Risk factors for salpingectomy were determined using binary logistic regression analysis. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS, version 24.0, to identify risk factors for non-tube-preserving surgery. Results 68 patients (70.1%) underwent laparoscopic salpingotomy and 29 patients (29.9%) had laparoscopic salpingectomy. The two groups differed with regard to age (p = 0.01) but not with regard to the parameters ‘gestational age’, ‘viability and rupture status of the ectopic pregnancy’ or ‘symptoms at presentation’. Patients who were known to have endometriosis prior to surgery or who were diagnosed with endometriosis intraoperatively were more likely to undergo salpingectomy (OR: 3.28; 95% CI: 0.9 – 10.8; p = 0.05). Calculated mean beta-hCG levels were higher in the salpingectomy group compared to the group who had tube-preserving salpingotomy (3277.8 IU/l vs. 9338.3 IU/l, p = 0.01). A cut-off beta-hCG value of 775 IU/l prior to surgery was predictive for salpingectomy with a true positive rate of 86.2% and increased the probability that salpingectomy would be necessary (OR: 5.23; 95% CI: 0.229 – 0.471; p = 0.005). Conclusion Endometriosis and a beta-hCG value of more than 775 IU/l significantly increased the risk for non-tube-preserving surgery in women with tubal pregnancy.

Background. Surgery is sometimes required for the management of tubal ectopic pregnancies. Historically, surgeons used electrosurgery to obtain hemostasis. Topical hemostatic sealants, such as FloSeal, may decrease the reliance on electrosurgery and reduce thermal injury to the tissue.Case. A 33-year-old G1 P0 received methotrexate for a right tubal pregnancy. The patient became symptomatic six days later and underwent a laparoscopic right salpingotomy. After multiple unsuccessful attempts to obtain hemostasis with electrocoagulation, FloSeal was used and hemostasis was obtained. Six weeks later, a hysterosalpingogram (HSG) confirmed tubal patency. The patient subsequently had an intrauterine pregnancy.Conclusion. FloSeal helped to achieve hemostasis during a laparoscopic salpingotomy and preserve tubal patency. FloSeal is an effective alternative and adjunct to electrosurgery in the surgical management of tubal pregnancy.

Une grossesse extra-utérine est une grossesse implantée en dehors de la cavité utérine. Il existe quatre thérapeutiques pour leur prise en charge : l’expectative, le traitement médical par méthotrexate, le traitement chirurgical conservateur (salpingotomie) et le traitement chirurgical radical (salpingectomie). Le choix entre ces 4 traitements repose tout d’abord sur des critères de faisabilité (traitement médical et expectative sont par exemple exclus en cas de rupture tubaire). Ces critères de faisabilité peuvent être résumés par la notion d’activité de la GEU. Cette notion permet de différencier les grossesses extra-utérines peu actives pouvant bénéficier d’un traitement médical des grossesses extra-utérines actives requérant un traitement chirurgical.Chaque traitement présente des avantages et des inconvénients et la principale question toujours en suspens concerne la fertilité après prise en charge d’une GEU. L’essai randomisé DEMETER a donc été conçu pour évaluer l’existence éventuelle d’une différence de fertilité de plus de 20% entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur d’une part pour les GEU peu actives et entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical d’autre part pour les GEU actives.Il n’y a pas de différence significative de plus de 20% de fertilité deux ans après la prise en charge d’une grossesse extra-utérine que ce soit pour les grossesses peu actives entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur ou pour les grossesses actives entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical. Par ailleurs, cet essai a aussi permis de conclure à la supériorité, en terme d’échec immédiat, du traitement chirurgical conservateur avec injection postopératoire de méthotrexate par rapport au traitement médical pour la prise en charge des GEU peu actives. La plus grande efficacité du traitement chirurgical conservateur est probablement majorée par l’injection postopératoire de méthotrexate. Le taux de conversion d’un traitement chirurgical conservateur vers un traitement chirurgical radical est important : 10% dans le groupe des GEU peu actives et 21% (significativement plus élevé) dans le groupe des GEU actives. Enfin, Le délai de guérison est plus court après traitement chirurgical conservateur qu’après traitement médical.Ces résultats couplés aux données de la littérature permettent d’élaborer des recommandations sur la prise en charge des grossesses extra-utérines. Notamment, pour les GEU peu actives avec un taux d’hCG inférieur à 5000UI/ml sans signe de rupture tubaire ou de défaillance hémodynamique, un traitement médical par méthotrexate doit être proposé sous réserve d’une bonne compliance de la patiente pour le suivi. Une prise en charge par chirurgie conservatrice reste une option valide. Dans ce cas, une injection postopératoire de méthotrexate sera réalisée systématiquement dans les 24 heures suivant l’intervention. Le traitement des GEU actives est chirurgical et la décision entre conservateur et radical a lieu en peropératoire. Enfin, une information aux patientes pourra être délivrée sur l’absence de différence de fertilité 2 ans après le traitement d’une GEU
An ectopic pregnancy is a pregnancy implanted outside uterine cavity. There are four different treatments to manage tubal ectopic pregnancy: expectation, medical treatment (methotrexate), conservative surgery (salpingotomy) and radical surgery (salpingectomy). The choice between these different treatments is based on feasibility criteria (medical treatment and expectation are not feasible in case of tubal rupture). These feasibility criteria can be summarized by activity of ectopic pregnancy. This activity allowed differentiating less active ectopic pregnancies that can be supported by medical treatment and active ectopic pregnancies that required surgery.All of these treatments present advantages and disadvantages and the major unresolved issue concerns subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy. Randomized trial DEMETER has thus been designed to evaluate a difference of 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy and between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. Differences for two years subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy were not more than 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy as between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. This trial also allowed concluding to the superiority of conservative surgery with a systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate compared to medical treatment for management of less active ectopic pregnancy. This superiority might be enhanced by postoperative methotrexate injection. The conversion rate to radical surgery when a conservative surgery is decided is important: 10% for less active ectopic pregnancy and 21% (significantly higher) for active ectopic pregnancy. Recovery time is shorter after conservative surgery compared to medical management.Results of DEMETER trial and literature review allowed giving guidelines for management of ectopic pregnancy. Less active ectopic pregnancy with hCG rate less than 5.000UI/l without tubal rupture or hemodynamic failure can be managed in first intention by medical treatment (methotrexate) if the women is assiduous to a close check. However, conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy is a good option. A systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate in the 24 first hours after surgery should be recommended. Active ectopic pregnancy has to be managed surgically and decision between conservative and radical surgery should be done in the operative room. Finally, women have to be informed about the absence of difference between treatments for subsequent fertility