Female sterilization reversal in the era of in-vitro fertilization.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Regret after female sterilization is not uncommon in the United States. Prior to the development of assisted reproductive technology (ART), surgical reversal of sterilization was the only option for patients interested in fertility. First performed in 1972, this procedure has since been refined over the years by gynaecologic surgeons. With in-vitro fertilization (IVF) gaining popularity, interest in sterilization reversal has waned. However, sterilization reversal should remain an important option in patients seeking pregnancy after tubal ligation. RECENT FINDINGS: A direct comparison between IVF and sterilization reversal is challenging due to inherent differences in reporting fertility outcomes. However, sterilization reversal may optimize fertility in younger women, whereas IVF may be more effective in older women. The surgical approach to sterilization reversal can be laparotomic, laparoscopic or robotic. Clinical decision making should include consideration of the risk of ectopic pregnancy, interval from sterilization to reversal, type of sterilization procedure, planned anastomotic site and projected remaining tubal length. SUMMARY: In the era of IVF, sterilization reversal still has a place in the management in restoring fertility. Creating awareness of the role of sterilization reversal is the first step in improving access to adequate training in this procedure for the next generation of reproductive surgeons.

Laparoscopic Essure® Device Removal by En Bloc Salpingectomy-Cornuectomy with Intraoperative X-Ray Checking: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and morbidity of Essure® device removal via laparoscopic en bloc salpingectomy-cornuectomy resection (LSC) and the utility of confirmation of complete removal with an intraoperative X-ray of the removed specimen (IX-S). DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Academic hospitals of La Conception, Marseille, and Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, Montpellier, France. PATIENTS: Women who were not seeking future fertility seeking Essure® device removal by salpingectomy, between February 2017 and August 2018. INTERVENTIONS: All women underwent LSC. An IX-S was performed to confirm complete Essure® device removal. In the case of an unsatisfactory IX-S, an intraoperative pelvic X-ray control of the patient (IX-P) was performed. If IX-P diagnosed residual Essure® fragments, an additional resection was performed, and the removed tissue was checked by IX-S. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We included 72 women, and a total of 140 Essure® devices were removed. The IX-S confirmed complete Essure® device removal in 131 of 140 cases (93.6%) in 63 of 72 women (87.5%). Out of the 9 women with unsatisfactory IX-S, 6 had no residual Essure® fragments at IX-P, and Essure® device removal was considered complete. Three women had a persistent Essure® fragment at IX-P: an additional resection allowed complete removal in 2 cases and resulted in failure in 1 of 140 case (0.7%). There were 2 of 72 women (2.8%) intraoperative complications and 4 of 72 women (5.6%) postoperative grade 1 complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. CONCLUSION: Essure® device removal by LSC appears to be an effective and safe procedure. IX-S is a useful method to evaluate whether the removal of Essure® device is complete during an LSC procedure.

Robotic Single-Site Tubal Reanastomosis: The Robotic Factor.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the advantages of using robotic assistance in tubal reanastomosis surgery. DESIGN: A narrated instructional video. SETTING: University Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (Canadian Task Force Classification III). PATIENT: A 33-year-old woman, G2P2003, who regretted her prior tubal ligation; she continued to request for a tubal reversal with a desire to conceive in the near future. A single-site approach was decided on when she expressed concern for the cosmetic aftermath of multiport surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Robotic single-site tubal reanastomosis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We performed robotic single-site tubal reanastomosis on the patient. We used the energy instruments of the monopolar hook and the bipolar slotted grasper. Entry was performed in the umbilicus, after which an abdominal survey was conducted to determine and locate the blocked fallopian tubes. A cold scissor, to avoid additional damage to the tubes, was used to resect the portion of the right blocked tube, and a neonatal feeding tube was inserted though both sections of the tube to ensure proper alignment during the repair. Additionally, a figure of eight suture was placed in the mesosalpinx to reduce the amount of tension during the tubal reanastomosis. We used 4 interrupted 5-0 PDS sutures, with 2 wristed needle drivers, to establish and precisely align the 2 sections of tube, first in the mucosal layer and then in the serosal layer, to achieve proper retention. Upon successful chromopertubation with methylene blue dye, the process was repeated on the left side. A successful tubal reanastomosis was completed and chromopertubation clearly demonstrated that the tubes were patent. Total operation time was approximately 100 minutes, resulting in a successful surgery. Estimated blood loss was only 20 mL. At 2 months after surgery a fluoroscopic hysterosalpingogram was conducted to verify the patency of the tubes. We concluded that both tubes were patent. CONCLUSIONS: The single-site robotic approach provides a potent and valuable method for tubal reanastomosis, rendering difficult surgical techniques more accessible.

Effectiveness of bilateral tubotubal anastomosis in a large outpatient population.

STUDY QUESTION: Is bilateral tubotubal anastomosis a successful treatment in an outpatient patient population? SUMMARY ANSWER: For women wanting children after tubal sterilization, bilateral tubotubal anastomosis is an effective outpatient treatment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: With the current emphasis in reproductive medicine on high technology procedures, the effectiveness of female surgical sterilization reversal is often overlooked. Previous clinical studies of tubal sterilization reversal have been mostly retrospective analyses of small patient populations. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cohort of women who underwent outpatient bilateral tubotubal anastomosis from January 2000 to June 2013 was followed prospectively until December 2014 to determine the proportions of women undergoing the procedure who became pregnant and who had live births. Data were collected at the time of pregnancy. Differences in pregnancy rates and live birth rates associated with age, race and sterilization method were evaluated. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A total of 6692 women, aged 20-51 years, underwent outpatient bilateral tubotubal anastomosis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The crude overall pregnancy rate was 69%. The crude overall birth rate was 35%. Results varied according to age at sterilization reversal and the method of sterilization. Women under 30 years of age at reversal of ring/clip sterilizations had an 88% pregnancy rate and 62% birth rate. Pregnancy and birth rates declined as age increased at sterilization reversal. Coagulation sterilization reversals resulted in the lowest rates of pregnancies and births. Ligation/resection reversals had intermediate success rates. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Limitations of our study include probable underreporting of pregnancies based on patient-initiated reports; possible errors in the reporting of pregnancies or early miscarriages that may have been based solely on home pregnancy tests; and probable over-reporting of the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancies. We identified age and sterilization method as being associated with subsequent pregnancy, however, in order to be considered predictive, the associations would need to be validated in an independent second prospectively studied group of representative patients. Finally, we also included patients in the study population who had additional surgical procedures performed at the time of tubotubal anastomosis (e.g. uterine myomectomy, fimbrioplasty, ovarian cystectomy and adhesiolysis), factors that could result in differences in pregnancy statistics in our study versus other patient populations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results of this study can help inform patients and clinicians about this low technology alternative to IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Update on long-acting reversible methods.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The last several years have seen a number of important clinical and academic advances in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods, such that many professional medical organizations now recommend these methods as first-line contraception for all women. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent data support the use of LARC in a variety of special circumstances including adolescents, nulliparous women and immediately postpartum and postabortion. Evidence also shows that traditional methods of pain control with intrauterine device (IUD) insertion and cervical preparation prior to insertion may not be warranted. Further, the extended use of IUDs is safer and more effective than previously realized. SUMMARY: The rising uptake of LARC methods in the United States has the potential to dramatically decrease undesired pregnancies and abortion rates, and should be considered an effective option in the majority of women.

Laparoscopic non-microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the pregnancy rate achieved through laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis using only standard 5 mm laparoscopic instruments and standard suturing material. METHODS: Data from 100 consecutive laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis procedures done between September 2002 and September 2010 were retrospectively analysed. All procedures were performed by the same surgeon using standard 5 mm laparoscopic instruments and with the placing of three or four sutures of standard polyglycan 4/0 suturing material. The main outcome measures were: (intrauterine) pregnancy rate and live birth rate before and after 40 years of age, and tubal patency rate. RESULTS: Six patients had no active child wish and six others were lost to follow-up, thus leaving 88 of 100 patients for evaluation. Fifty-eight of these conceived, giving a total pregnancy rate (PR) of 66%. The PR in women younger than 40 years was significantly greater than that achieved by those aged 40 or more (73% vs. 29%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis with standard 5 mm laparoscopic instruments results in a satisfactory pregnancy rate.

Minimally invasive versus open surgery for reversal of tubal sterilization.

BACKGROUND: Although tubal sterilization procedures are considered to be permanent, requests for reversal of the procedure (re-canalisation) are not infrequent. The reversal procedure can be done either by an open laparotomy or by minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic approach). OBJECTIVES: To compare the relative effectiveness and safety of reversal of tubal sterilization by open laparotomy, laparoscopy and robotically assisted endoscopy. SEARCH METHODS: On 23 October 2012 we searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Review Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 10, 2012); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; clinical trials registries; regional databases; conference proceedings; and references for relevant published, unpublished and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing the different methods of surgical reversal of tubal sterilisation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No trials that met the selection criteria were identified. MAIN RESULTS: No data for evaluation were obtained AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently there is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to recommend or refute the use of a minimally invasive surgical approach (laparoscopic or robotic) or open surgery for reversal of tubal sterilization. There is a need for well conducted and reported randomised clinical trials to generate reliable evidence to inform clinical practice.

Robot-assisted tubo-tubal reanastomosis after sterilization in 10 steps.

Five to 20% of women regret having a tubal ligation. These women are generally otherwise fertile and have a better chance of pregnancy than other patients experiencing infertility, whether by in vitro fertilization or after tubal surgery. Historically, tubal anastomosis surgery has long been performed by microsurgery through laparotomy, which provided very high precision but was associated with some degree of morbidity. The parallel development of in vitro fertilization and laparoscopy have contributed to reducing the indications for tubal surgery. The laparoscopic approach is challenging because of the number and precision of the sutures needed. The robot-assisted laparoscopic approach may reduce the surgical difficulty and improve the accessibility of this technique. We have described the technique of tubo-tubal reanastomosis after sterilization with robot-assisted laparoscopy in 10 steps. Robot-assisted laparoscopy provides favourable conditions for performing tubo-tubal reanastomosis after sterilization due to the camera stability, precision of movement, and amplitude of articulations.

Microsurgical anastomosis of the fallopian tubes after tubal ligation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Between 20% and 30% of women who have undergone tubal ligation regret their decision. The alternative to regain fertility for these women is either in vitro fertilization or tubal re-anastomosis. This article presents a systematic review with meta-analysis to assess the current evidence on the efficacy of tubal recanalization surgery in patients who have previously undergone tubal ligation. STUDY DESIGN: The search was conducted in the World of Science (WOS) database, The Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov record using the keywords "tubal reversal", "tubal reanastomosis" and "tubal anastomosis". The review was carried out by two of the authors. Data from 22 studies were evaluated, comprising over 14,113 patients who underwent the studied surgery, following strict inclusion criteria: articles published between January 2012 and June 2022, in English and with a sample size bigger than 10 patients were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: The overall pregnancy rate after anastomosis was found to be 65.3 % (95 % CI: 61.0-69.6). The percentage of women who had at least one live birth, known as the birth rate, was 42.6 % (95 % CI: 34.9-51.4). Adverse outcomes after surgery were also examined: the observed abortion rate among women who underwent surgery was 9.4 % (95 % CI: 7.0-11.7), and the overall ectopic pregnancy rate was 6.8 % (95 % CI: 4.6-9.0). No differences were found between the outcomes when differentiating surgical approaches: laparotomy, laparoscopy, or robotic-assisted surgery. The patient's age was identified as the most significant determining factor for fertility restoration. Finally, when comparing the results of tubal reversal with in vitro fertilization, reversal procedures appear more favorable for patients over 35 years old, while the results are similar for patients under 35 years old, but more data is needed to evaluate this finding. CONCLUSION: Therefore, the available literature review demonstrates that surgical anastomosis following tubal ligation is a reproducible technique with relevant success rates, performed by multiple expert groups worldwide.

High pregnancy rate after microsurgical tubal reanastomosis by temporary loose parallel 4-quadrant sutures technique: a long long-term follow-up report on 961 cases.

BACKGROUND: Only a limited portion of sterilized women undergo tubal reanastomosis due to high costs, limited availability of qualified practitioners willing to perform the procedure and increasing success rates with IVF. However, IVF has complications and an increased risk of ectopic pregnancy and multiple pregnancies. Recently, the importance of specialized training for tubal anastomosis has been re-emphasized. This study aimed to report the procedure of our microsurgical tubal reanastomosis by a temporary loose parallel 4-quadrant suture technique and its high pregnancy outcome over the last 20 years. METHODS: This clinical study retrospectively analyzed data on 961 consecutive patients who underwent tubal reversal between March 1988 and August 2007 in a large urban medical center. All surgical operations were performed by microsurgical tubal reanastomosis using a temporary loose parallel 4-quadrant suture technique by a single surgeon. Subsequent pregnancy outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The overall pregnancy rate was 85.1, 82.6 being intrauterine and 2.5% ectopic. The pregnancy rate was significantly reduced in patients over 40 years old (53.9%) compared with patients aged 40 years or less (90.3%) (P < 0.05). Repair done at the interstitial-ampulla site yielded a significantly higher ectopic pregnancy rate (20.0%) compared with other anastomosis sites (0-3.2%) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that our technique resulted in a high pregnancy rate comparable with the level of natural fertility. The study also reveals that ectopic pregnancy frequently occurs in tubal reanastomosis of the interstitial-ampulla site compared with other sites.

Fallopian tube reanastomosis by laparotomy versus laparoscopy: a meta-analysis.

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.

The feasibility of reduced sutures in 3D laparoscopic tubal sterilization reversal.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To show the technique of reduced sutures in 3D laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis. DESIGN: Step-by-step demonstration of the procedure using video. SETTING: Laparoscopic tubal sterilization reversal demands high precision and requires both skill and experience. Conventionally, 4 to 6 interrupted patterns using 6-0 to 8-0 absorbable sutures are used for laparoscopic tubal reanastomosis. We used fewer and larger sutures under a magnified 3D view to perform the procedure. INTERVENTIONS: We presented a case of a 42-year-old woman, gravida 3, para 3, who underwent tubal sterilization during Cesarean section 10 years ago. Preoperative hysterosalpingography (HSG) showed bilateral distal tubal occlusion. The procedure started with the subserosal injection of diluted vasopressin in both proximal and distal ends and in the mesosalpinx to facilitate dissection and hemostasis. After transection of tubal stump and removal of scar tissue, we used a 3 Fr ureteral catheter as the stent to facilitate suturing. Three interrupted 4-0 monocryl sutures were used for suturing both tubal mucosal and muscular layers at 6, 2, and 10 o'clock sites. We performed bilateral ampullo-ampullary reanastomosis. The tubes were successfully reanastomosed, and patency was confirmed by chromotubation performed at the end of the procedure (Figure 1). The operation lasted for 71 minutes. The operative blood loss was less than 50 ml. Patent right fallopian tube was confirmed on postoperative HSG 1 month later. The patient had a successful pregnancy 8 months after the operation. CONCLUSION: Our experience shows the feasibility of 3D laparoscopy for tubal reanastomosis using reduced sutures. The technique alleviates the damage to the fallopian tube. The operative time, hospital stay, and postoperative adhesions were significantly lower than the conventional method with a comparable success rate.

Is there any difference between pregnancy results after tubal reanastamosis performed laparotomically, laparoscopically, and robotically?

INTRODUCTION: Tubal reanastamosis offers hope to conceive again. However, there are many factors that affect the success of this procedure. In our study we aimed to compare the pregnancy rates of the surgical methods used for tubal reanastamosis in pregnancy requested after tubal sterilization. METHODS: In our study we compared the rates of pregnancies after reanastamosis retrospectively in female patients under the age of 40 who underwent reanastamosis between 2010 and 2019 with laparotomic, laparoscopic and robotic methods. A single layer of 4 quadrant 6/0 number polydioxanone absorbable sutures were used in all surgical methods. A similar surgical technique was used. RESULTS: In surgical methods (laparotomy, laparoscopy, and robotics), there was a statistical difference between the three groups in terms of operation times of surgical methods used for tubal reanastamosis (p < 0.05). Laparotomy, laparoscopy, and robotics pregnancy rates were 52.6% (n = 41), 67.3% (n = 37), 61.2% (n = 63), respectively. There was no statistical difference between groups in terms of pregnancy rates. However, odds ratio (OR) values of the laparoscopy group and robotics group probability of conception were 1.536 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.813-2.898), 1.111 (95% CI, 0.656-1.879) higher, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no statistical difference between the surgical methods used for tubal reanastamosis, we think that the laparoscopic surgical method may be preferable due to the shorter hospital stay. We think that the previous method of bilateral tubaligastion (BTL), the site of reanastasis, and the time between BTL and reanastomosis were effective in pregnancy success.

Pregnancy outcomes and prognostic factors from tubal sterilization reversal by sutureless laparoscopical re-anastomosis: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Female sterilization is a widely used contraceptive method but in a small group of women, post-sterilization regret occurs. A dilemma for these women is the choice between surgical re-anastomosis and IVF. We evaluated the factors that affected pregnancy rate after laparoscopic tubal re-anastomosis for sterilization regret. METHODS: We included women who underwent a laparoscopic tubal re-anastomosis between January 1997 and March 2008 at Máxima Medical Centre, The Netherlands, in a retrospective cohort study. Microsurgical laparoscopic re-anastomosis was performed using a serosa-muscular fixation/biological glue technique. The primary outcome was time to clinical pregnancy (TTP). Other outcomes were ongoing pregnancy and ectopic pregnancy. We studied whether clinical characteristics, including age, fertility history, BMI, semen quality, remaining tubal length and type of anastomosis, could predict the chance of pregnancy. RESULTS: Data from 127 patients were analysed. The 40-month cumulative clinical pregnancy rate was 74%, whereas the ongoing pregnancy rate was 59%. There were five ectopic pregnancies (3.9%). Only age was found to influence the probability of a positive pregnancy test, hazard rate ratio (HRR): 0.32 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-0.88] and ongoing pregnancy [HRR 0.21 (95% CI 0.05-0.87)]. Previous pregnancy increased pregnancy probability [HRR: 2.2 (95% CI 0.51-9.8)]. A total sperm motility count of <20 million was related to prolonged TTP. CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless laparoscopic tubal re-anastomosis is an effective treatment for women who regret sterilization. Age, previous pregnancies and sperm quality should be considered when counselling for tubal sterilization reversal versus IVF. A randomized prospective trial comparing success rates of surgical reversal and IVF after sterilization regret should be conducted.

Tubal anastomosis after tubal sterilization: a review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate various techniques for restoring tubal patency after sterilisation. METHODS: A search strategy was designed, and for each subject either thesaurus terms (MeSH descriptors) or terms from the title or summary were used. RESULTS: Mean length of hospital stay following laparoscopy seems to be shorter in comparison with laparotomy (3.3 vs. 6.1 days, P < 0.05). Rate of conversion to laparotomy is 5%. Pregnancy rates observed are between 54 and 88% for laparotomy and 31-85% for laparoscopy. Mean time to conception was between 2 and 9.6 months. Most pregnancies occurred in the 2 years following restoration of tubal patency (cumulative conception rate 80% at 12 months). Young age (<35 years), type of ligature (rings), how recently the ligature was done (<8 years), the anastomosis site (in the middle of the tube) and a good length of remaining tube (>7 cm) are the factors that govern whether there can be good restoration of tubal patency. Ectopic pregnancy rates observed are between 1.7 and 12% for laparotomy and 0-7% for laparoscopy. There are no randomised or quasi-randomised studies comparing tubal anastomosis and in vitro fertilization. CONCLUSIONS: There are few good-quality controlled studies in this area. Results of restoration of tubal patency seem to be comparable, regardless of the route of approach (laparotomy or laparoscopy).

Organ-preserving and reconstructive microsurgery of the fallopian tubes in tubal infertility: still an alternative to in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Tubal infertility mostly results from infections. Conception only is possible through complex treatments (in vitro fertilization or surgery). Success cannot be guaranteed, even after repeated treatments. Unfortunately, many couples are not informed about the prospect for success of tubal reconstruction. Problems of in vitro fertilization are low pregnancy and birth rates of 28.4% and <20% respectively (Germany) and the high number of multiple pregnancies (21%). In this retrospective study 462 women with acquired tubal infertility and further 127 women after previous sterilization underwent microsurgical treatment (microsurgical adhesiolysis, anastomosis, fimbrioplasty, salpingostomy, and refertilization due to former sterilization). The main outcome measures are the pregnancy and birth rates following the microsurgical procedure. Pregnancy and birth rates of 43.4% and 29.2%, respectively, were higher than the outcomes post-single in vitro fertilization (abortion: 6.4%, extrauterine pregnancy: 7.9%). When reversal of sterilization was performed, pregnancy and birth rates were higher at 73% and 50.6%, respectively (abortion: 15.7%, extrauterine pregnancy: 6.7%). The advantages of reconstructive microsurgery over in vitro fertilization include the ideally permanent restoration of woman's ability to conceive naturally (repeated pregnancies are possible without further therapy), a high postoperative birth rate overall, and avoidance of multiple births. It is advisable to inform the patient about the objective possibility of reconstructive tubal surgery.

A Novel Technique for Essure Reversal.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: An increasing number of women are seeking removal of the Essure sterilization device due to symptoms including pelvic pain, abnormal bleeding, and allergic reaction. A fraction of these women also desire a future pregnancy and request sterilization reversal at the time of device removal. We present a novel technique for Essure reversal in addition to our experience with three cases. METHODS: Simultaneous laparoscopy and hysteroscopy is used to remove the device followed by laparoscopic reimplantation of the distal fallopian tube to the uterine fundus. A video of our method is included and the outcomes of three patients reported. RESULTS: Three women underwent laparoscopic Essure reversal for device-attributed symptoms and desire to restore fertility between 2017 and 2018. All procedures were uncomplicated with restoration of tubal patency in one or both fallopian tubes on follow-up hysterosalpingogram. Over a period of 4 to 10 months of followup, no pregnancies have been reported. CONCLUSION: Essure reversal is a feasible technique for removing the device and restoring tubal patency; however, more data are needed on pregnancy outcomes following this novel procedure.

A different time for tubal surgery.

"An object in motion tends to remain in motion along a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force." -Isaac Newton.

Hysterosalpingography in the investigation of women requesting reversal of sterilization. Should it play a role?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of hysterosalpingography (HSG) in the investigation of women requesting reversal of sterilization (ROS). STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, cohort study at a university-affiliated, tertiary fertility clinic. All women proceeding to surgery were investigated with HSG in addition to other routine screening. Findings from HSG were tabulated to document the prevalence of abnormalities and correlated with histologic findings in resected tubal segments. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen women of 166 referred for ROS underwent HSG during the initial evaluation. HSG depicted abnormal tubal images in only 2 cases (1.7%) and abnormal uterine images in 15 (12.9%) cases. In the cases of abnormal tubal findings, there was no association with histologic findings. The specificity of HSG as a diagnostic screening tool was 90%; however, the small number of cases with abnormal histology prevented calculation of an accurate estimate of sensitivity of HSG as an investigative tool before ROS. A less invasive method of imaging the uterus, such as a vaginal ultrasound, may provide more valuable information in evaluating the future fertility outcome in these women. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of abnormalities of the proximal oviductal segment identified by HSG is too low to warrant the routine use of HSG as a diagnostic tool.

Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery tubal reanastomosis: a novel route for tubal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate how a transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) tubal reanastomosis is a novel route for tubal surgery. The surgical technique is a combination of traditional vaginal surgery with single-site surgical skills. DESIGN: The surgical technique is explained in a stepwise fashion with the use of surgical video footage. The video uses a surgical case to demonstrate the specific techniques necessary to perform a NOTES tubal reanastomosis. SETTING: Teaching university. PATIENT(S): A 42-year-old female G2P2 with a history of tubal ligation 11 years before presentation requesting a tubal recanalization. INTERVENTION(S): Transvaginal NOTES tubal reanastomosis was initiated with a posterior colpotomy. A single-site gelport was placed. The fallopian tubes were hydrodissected, the blocked portion of each tube was removed, an epidural catheter was threaded through each lumen, and the two remaining segments of each tube were sutured together in an end-to-end fashion using single-site suturing skills. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Transvaginal NOTES tubal reanastomosis as an alternative route for tubal reanastomosis. RESULT(S): The bilateral fallopian tubes were recanalized with bilateral tubal patency. This was confirmed 8 weeks postoperatively with a three-dimensional sonohystogram, which showed patency of the bilateral fallopian tubes. CONCLUSION(S): The current preferred technique for reversal of a tubal sterilization is to perform a minimally invasive surgery with an end-to-end anastomosis. This gives the patient a 60%-90% intrauterine pregnancy rate postoperatively. NOTES has the benefits of a fast recovery, no abdominal incisional pain, and an extremely cosmetic outcome. Current research has shown a 0%-3.1% range for the risk of pelvic infection in transvaginal NOTES if prophylactic antibiotics are administered during the surgery. The NOTES tubal reanastomosis combines the traditional vaginal surgery technique of creating a posterior colpotomy with single-site surgical skills like suturing and knot tying. The surgery is completed through a single transvaginal port without an abdominal incision. In the hands of a skilled minimally invasive surgeon, transvaginal NOTES tubal reanastomosis is a feasible and alternative route for this procedure.