Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saravelos, H. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cooke, I. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saravelos, H. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cooke, I. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 10, No. 11, pp. 2887-2894, 1995
© 1995 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

research-article

An analysis of the outcome of microsurgical and laparoscopic adhesiolysis for infertility

Harry G. Saravelos1, Tin-Chiu Li and Ian D. Cooke

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessop Hospital for Women Leavygreave Road, Sheffield S3 7RE, UK

Correspondence: 1 To whom correspondence should be addressed

We evaluated 81 women with adnexal adhesions and no male factor who underwent microsurgical (n = 59) and laparoscopic (n = 22) adhesiolysis for infertility. The cumulative conception rates for all 81 patients at 12 and 24 months were 41 and 44% respectively. The impact of the following variables on cumulative conception rates for all patients was examined: age, duration of infertility, type of infertility, ovulatory status, presence and stage of endometriosis, adhesion grade, adnexal status (bilateral or unilateral disease, unilateral tubal absence), history of previous surgery, history of pelvic inflammatory disease and treatment modality (microsurgical versus laparoscopic). The results of independent comparisons of subgroups within each of these variables may be biased because of the interrelationships between the variables. To overcome this problem, a stepwise Cox's proportional hazards regression analysis was employed. Our analysis showed that the single most significant variable influencing the cumulative conception rates was the duration of infertility (P < 0.005). For every additional year of infertility, the probability of pregnancy after adhesiolysis (microsurgical or laparoscopic) was reduced by ~ 20%. Cumulative conception rates at 12 and 24 months after microsurgical adhesiolysis were 36 and 40% respectively, while after laparoscopic adhesiolysis they were 57% at 12 and 24 months. When imbalances were adjusted between the two treatment groups, there was no statistically significant difference between the cumulative conception rates for microsurgical and laparoscopic adhesiolysis.

Key words: infertility/laparoscopic adhesiolysis/microsurgical adhesiolysis


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The Obstetrician and GynaecologistHome page
D. Siassakos, A. Syed, and P. Wardle
Tubal disease and assisted reproduction
Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), April 1, 2008; 10(2): 80 - 87.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 SURG INNOVHome page
M. Yusoff Dawood
Laparoscopic Surgery of the Fallopian Tubes and Ovaries
Surgical Innovation, June 1, 1999; 6(2): 58 - 67.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.