<i>Objectives:</i> To determine whether clomiphene citrate (CC) can be implicated as a cause for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and other visual disturbances. <i>Methods: </i>For this systematic review, we performed a search of the following databases: PubMed (1976 to November 2009), Medline Plus 2009, Cochrane Library (1996 to November 2009), Google and Google Scholar (1996 to November 2009). Thirty-five relevant titles (25 full papers and 10 abstracts) were identified and read by authors. No review has been published in the literature. The publications included describe adverse effects with clomid and selective estrogen receptor modulators and in particular visual disturbances. The population consisted of infertility patients under ovulation induction with CC. The main outcome measures were loss of vision due to CRVO and other visual changes. <i>Results:</i> CC may predispose to CRVO, but further trials are clearly needed in this area. <i>Conclusion:</i> Physicians should be aware of the potential risk of CC, especially in patients with associated risk factors for CRVO. If visual disturbances occur, therapy should be terminated and the patient referred for specialist ophthalmic care.

Objective: To compare efficacy of sterilization reversals by laparotomy versus laparoscopy. Design: Meta-analysis. Search Strategy: Electronic searches were carried out for randomized controlled trials and retrospective and prospective clinical studies. Search engines such as PubMed, Science Direct, Medline and the Cochrane database were made use of. Our restrictions were English human studies published from 1989 to January 2010. Interventions: Microsurgical tubal reanastomosis performed comparing laparoscopy with laparotomy using a microsurgical technique. Outcome Measures:Primary: overall pregnancy rates, including positive clinical pregnancy, intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates. Secondary: surgery time. Results: Three retrospective comparative studies were retrieved from international data that investigated laparotomy versus laparoscopy. A total number of 184 patients were included, 88 and 96 respectively undergoing laparoscopy and laparotomy. Pregnancy rates achieved by laparoscopy ranged from 65 to 80.5% (mean 74.43%) and by laparotomy from 70 to 80% (mean 71.33%). A subanalysis of two of the three comparative studies show that laparoscopy reversal surgery requires a statistically significant longer operative time than does laparotomy (p < 0.00001). Conclusions: There is no difference between the laparoscopy and laparotomy approach to tubal reanastomosis when regarding overall pregnancy rates, intrauterine and ectopic pregnancy rates.

No abstract