Salpingectomy Versus Aspiration of Hydrosalpingeal Fluid Prior to IVF-ET.A Randomized Controlled Trial

The adverse impact of hydrosalpinx on in vitro fertilisation embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcomes has been confirmed by several retrospective and prospective studies .

Cochrane review of prospective randomised trials of laparoscopic salpingectomy confirmed the beneficial effect of laparoscopic salpingectomy on IVF-ET outcomes in patients with hydrosalpinges.

Surgery is not usually safe especially in patients with extensive adhesions, morbid obesity or previous multiple laparotomies. Furthermore, many infertile couples refuse to undergo bilateral salpingectomy or proximal tubal occlusion because these procedures remove any hope of spontaneous pregnancy. Other less invasive options for patients with hydrosalpinges as ultrasound-guided aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid, antibiotics (alone or combined with aspiration) and hysteroscopic occlusion of fallopian tube were studied in order to find an alternative to salpingectomy . Although these methods are simple and getting popular, current data are inadequate to recommend these treatment options instead of salpingectomy because most of the supporting evidences for these methods come from small retrospective studies.

A recent randomized controlled trial revealed that the aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid at the time of oocyte retrieval was associated with improved implantation rate and pregnancy rates.

The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the efficacy of ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid with salpingectomy in the management patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinges undergoing IVF-ET