Risk factor for interstitial pregnancy following ipsilateral salpingectomy? A retrospective matched case control study.

BACKGROUND: Interstitial pregnancy may still happen even after ipsilateral salpingectomy, resulting in massive hemorrhage. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to identify risk factors associated with interstitial pregnancy following ipsilateral salpingectomy and discuss possible prevention. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single, large, university-affiliated hospital. Data of 29 patients diagnosed with interstitial pregnancy following ipsilateral salpingectomy from January 2011 to November 2020 were assigned into the case group (IP group). Whereas there were 6151 patients with intrauterine pregnancy after unilateral salpingectomy in the same period. A sample size of 87 control patients was calculated to achieve statistical power (99.9%) and an α of 0.05. The age, BMI and previous salpingectomy side between the two group were adjusted with PSM at a ratio of 1:3. After PSM, 87 intrauterine pregnancy patients were successfully matched to 29 IP patients. RESULTS: After PSM, parous women were more common and intrauterine operation was more frequent in the IP group compared with control group (P<0.05). There was only one patient undergoing IVF-ET in the IP group as compared with 29 cases in the control group (3.4% vs. 33.3%, P<0.05). Salpingectomy was performed on 5 patients in the IP group and 4 patients in the control group due to hydrosalpinx (P<0.05). Logistic regression indicated that hydrosalpinx was the high risk factor of interstitial pregnancy following ipsilateral salpingectomy (OR = 8.175). CONCLUSIONS: Hydrosalpinx appears to be an independent factor contributing to interstitial pregnancy following ipsilateral salpingectomy in subsequent pregnancy.

Postoperative reproductive results of infertile patients with intrauterine adhesions: A retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the reproductive outcomes after hysteroscopic separation of intrauterine adhesions (IUA) in infertile patients due to IUA. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients with fertility requirements and infertility due to IUA. Data were collected from the hospital medical records and by follow-up by telephone. The impact on pregnancy and pregnancy outcome of preoperative adhesion, menstrual conditions before and after surgery and postoperative re-adhesion was analysed. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients (median age, 28 years) were enrolled in the study. There was a significant correlation between preoperative menstrual patterns and pregnancy rate. There were 56 pregnancies (pregnancy rate 52.83%) after the operation. Patients with improved menstruation after the operation had a significantly higher pregnancy rate (pregnancy rate 56.25%; 45 of 80 patients) compared with the patients that did not experience any improvement in their postoperative menstrual status (pregnancy rate 21.43%; three of 14 patients). Of the 56 pregnancies, 40 (71.43%) resulted in live births and six (10.71%) patients had miscarriages. A total of 54 of 56 patients (96.43%) became pregnant within 2 years. CONCLUSION: Pregnancy after intrauterine adhesion separation has a high rate of miscarriage and obstetric complications, so close monitoring of the patient is required.