Ovarian reserve following cesarean section with salpingectomy vs tubal ligation: a randomized trial

Bilateral salpingectomy to reduce the risk of ovarian/fallopian/peritoneal cancer in women at average risk: a position statement of the Korean Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (KSOG)

“…However, no sterilization-related complications were observed in any of the groups. Ganer Herman et al [ 67 ] also showed longer operation time in women who underwent bilateral salpingectomy than in those who did not undergo salpingectomy (66.0±20.5 vs. 52.0±15.8 minutes, P =0.01); however, the rates of operation-related complications and hemoglobin decrement were similar in the 2 groups. The authors stated that salpingectomy seems to be a safer alternative to tubal ligation in women who desire permanent sterilization, during a planned cesarean delivery.…”

Impact of bilateral total salpingectomy versus standard tubal ligation at time of cesarean section on ovarian reserve: A randomized controlled trial

“…Also, pilot RCT comparing 46 parturients (32 women of them completed the trial follow up, 16 in BTS arm and 18 BPS (STL)) found that AMH prior to CS as well as at 6 -8 weeks postpartum and the increase in AMH didn't differs significantly between both group (ΔAMH were increase of 0.58 ± 0.98 in (BTS) vs. 0.39 ± 0.41 in (BPS) ng/ml, p=0.45) [23] . However, they reported prolonged operative time in BTS parturients over BPS participants by 13 min (66.0 ± 20.5 versus 52.3 ± 15.8 minutes, p = 0.01) as well as there were no differences in feasibility and surgical complications [23] . Studies regarding RRS in benign gynecology did not report detrimental impacts on ovarian reserve [35,36,37,38] .…”

“…Also, this study demonstrated that both procedures were equally feasible as well as perioperative surgical consequences were similar (P > 0.05). Studies were evaluating BTS versus BPS at the time of CS concentrating on feasibility as well as perioperative surgical consequences [16,17,18,19,20,21,22] , while there is only one published RCT assessed procedures impacts on ovarian reserve (23). Researchers report a variable degree of feasibility, perioperative surgical consequences and this could be explained based on heterogeneity in surgical experiences as well as surgical techniques and surgical instruments.…”

“…These high surgical consequences with BTS are secondary to pregnancy-related pelvic engorgement and anatomical changes [15,16] . Trials comparing BPS versus BTS at Cs concentrated on surgical consequences evaluation [17,18,19,20,21,22] , rather than impacts of this surgical procedures on ovarian blood supply and its subsequent impacts on ovarian functions [23] .…”

Mediated and unmediated influence of pathological factors on ovarian reserve (a review)

“…В некоторых работах [25] отмечается, что удаление маточных труб влечет за собой снижение показателей овариального резерва, но на частоту наступления беременности в программах ЭКО это не влияет. Однако в последние годы появились работы, в которых доказывается обратное [31,32].…”