PLoS One 2016 25;11(3):e0152343. Epub 2016 Mar 25.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang, Henan Province, China.
Download full-text PDF
Lancet 2014 04 3;383(9927):1483-1489. Epub 2014 Feb 3.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Background: Tubal ectopic pregnancy can be surgically treated by salpingectomy, in which the affected Fallopian tube is removed, or salpingotomy, in which the tube is preserved. Despite potentially increased risks of persistent trophoblast and repeat ectopic pregnancy, salpingotomy is often preferred over salpingectomy because the preservation of both tubes is assumed to offer favourable fertility prospects, although little evidence exists to support this assumption. We aimed to assess whether salpingotomy would improve rates of ongoing pregnancy by natural conception compared with salpingectomy. Read More
Reprod Biomed Online 2010 Nov 30;21(5):687-93. Epub 2010 Jun 30.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
There is an ongoing debate whether tubal ectopic pregnancy should be treated by salpingotomy or salpingectomy. It is unknown which treatment women prefer in view of the potentially better fertility outcome but disadvantages of salpingotomy. This study investigated women surgically treated for tubal ectopic pregnancy and subfertile women desiring pregnancy and their preferences for salpingotomy relative to salpingectomy by means of a web-based discrete choice experiment consisting of 16 choice sets. Read More
Int J Surg 2017 Dec 22;48:59-63. Epub 2017 Sep 22.
Departments of Gynecology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, No. 158 Shangtang Rd, Hangzhou, 310014, China. Electronic address:
Objective: This study presents our experience with laparoscopic surgery for tubal ectopic pregnancy (EP), sums up the different features of two commonly utilized laparoscopic surgeries, and compares subsequent post-salpingectomy or -salpingotomy reproductive outcomes in women with tubal EPs.
Study Design: Medical history data of 95 patients diagnosed with tubal EP between January 2013 and December 2014 were analyzed in a retrospective, observational manner. All patients studied were offered two surgical management options: salpingectomy (removal of the entire fallopian tube), or salpingotomy (removal of products of gestation only, leaving the remainder of the tube intact). Read More
Hum Reprod 2015 Sep 13;30(9):2038-47. Epub 2015 Jul 13.
Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Study Question: Is salpingotomy cost effective compared with salpingectomy in women with tubal pregnancy and a healthy contralateral tube?
Summary Answer: Salpingotomy is not cost effective over salpingectomy as a surgical procedure for tubal pregnancy, as its costs are higher without a better ongoing pregnancy rate while risks of persistent trophoblast are higher.
What Is Known Already: Women with a tubal pregnancy treated by salpingotomy or salpingectomy in the presence of a healthy contralateral tube have comparable ongoing pregnancy rates by natural conception. Salpingotomy bears the risk of persistent trophoblast necessitating additional medical or surgical treatment. Read More