Consequences of Changing Current Standards: Endocrine Status After Routine Fallopian Tube Removal

Two study findings lead to conflictive points of view. On the one hand a routine removal of the Fallopian tubes is proclaimed to reduce cancer risk, on the other hand we know that surgical pelvic procedures result in early onset of menopause. Pokoradi et al were not able to distinctively tell which part of pelvic surgery (ie hysterectomy, oophorectomy, salpingectomy, tubal ligation?) is affecting menopause because data was not providing surgical details. Nevertheless, Dietl et al's statement "Timing of menopause and other long-term effects have not been studied yet...thus all negative effects are still speculative"1 can only partly be agreed upon regarding Pokoradi's findings. It might be too early to proclaim a routine Fallopian tube removal as long as there is no data on how much this procedure affects ovarian function. This is further supported by another statement in their study "Although most malignant serous "ovarian" carcinomas originate from the distal Fallopian tube, a smaller proportion of serous cancers as well as endometroid, clear cell, mucinous carcinomas are still thought to arise from ovarian surface epithelium.1" which means the exact impact on cancer prophylaxis can only be estimated due to a lack of studies. Other histopathologic entities might not be influenced by tube removal.