Subject(s)
Cleavage Stage, Ovum/cytology , Fertilization in Vitro , Oocytes/growth & development , Cell Survival , Embryo Transfer , Female , Humans , PregnancySubject(s)
Embryo Transfer/methods , Fertilization in Vitro/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Oocytes/physiology , Spermatocytes/physiology , Time FactorsSubject(s)
Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Apgar Score , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , PregnancyABSTRACT
Results of tubal reconstructive surgery must be periodically reviewed. This approach permits evaluation of improvements in individual techniques as well as comparison with the results of others performing similar surgery. It also enables meaningful dialogue between physician and patient regarding prospects for success in the physician's own hands. The senior author's experience with 143 cases of tubal reconstructive surgery is presented. Results of four distinct tubal reconstructive procedures are compared with results reported in the available microsurgical and macrosurgical literature. The term pregnancy rate was 45.7% for those who underwent lysis of adhesions, 50.0% among the tubal anastomosis group, and 20.8% among patients treated with a two-stage salpingostomy.
