Can diagnostic laparoscopy be avoided in routine investigation for infertility?

[Interest of laparoscopy in infertile couple with normal hysterosalpingography]

OBJECTIVES

The diagnostic laparoscopy has long been the key consideration in the export of female infertility. This place is being reconsidered, especially in the case of normal hysterosalpingogrophy (HSG), because of the advent of assisted reproductive technologies which are more efficient, and because of the improvement of medical imaging techniques which are more sensitive and specific. We wanted to clarify the place of the diagnostic laparoscopy in the balance of female infertility in normal HSG.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

It is a retrospective study on a series of 100 observations of infertile patients with a normal HSG and having a diagnostic laparoscopy in the department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at Farhat Hached hospital in Sousse (Tunisia) from 1st January 1993 to 1st March 2003.

RESULTS

The mean age was 32.3years; the mean duration of infertility was 70.47months. Laparoscopy revealed pelvic abnormalities in 45% of cases, dominated by disease tubo-adhesions (23%), endometriosis was found in 6% of cases. These anomalies are considered major in 23% of cases and minor in 22% of cases. Conducting a surgical procedure in the same operating time (adhesiolysis, tubal plastic surgery, electrocoagulation of endometriosis implants) could improve the prognosis of fertility. Only 20 patients were followed among the 45 with pelvic abnormalities, seven pregnancies have been completed (35% of cases).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy has improved the prognosis for the fertility of our patients by treating abnormalities involved in infertility. It is estimated that the prognosis can be improved by selecting patients with risk factors for pelvic abnormalities.

The Diagnostic Properties of Medical History in the Diagnosis of Tubal Pathology among Subfertile Patients

Objectives. To evaluate the diagnostic performance of medical history in the diagnosis of tubal pathology among subfertile patients. Patients and Methods. Prospective cross-sectional study was performed. Prior to tubal evaluation, medical history data were collected. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) for predicting tubal pathology as determined by laparoscopy and dye test were calculated for each issue of medical history. Results. 39.6 % (59/149) were diagnosed with tubal pathology. The sensitivity for the different issues ranged between 1.7 and 54.2% and the specificity between 75.6 and 97.8%. The estimated highest value of positive LR is attributed to the history of ectopic pregnancy and lowest of negative LR to pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and abdominal surgery. Conclusion. The positive history of PID, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), abdominal and laparoscopic surgery, and ectopic pregnancy are satisfactory screening tests for ruling the tubal pathology in. The negative history of evaluated issues is inappropriate for ruling the tubal damage out.

[Should a laparoscopy be necessary in case of infertility with normal tubes at hysterosalpingography?]

The aetiological assessment of an infertile couple includes several complementary biological and morphological examinations. Initial exploration of the female genital tract requires the performance of pelvic ultrasound and hysterosalpingography. The value of systematic laparoscopy in infertility assessment is still subject to debate. The aim of the present review is to evaluate arguments against the systematic use of laparoscopy and to define the place of the other tests as Chlamydia Trachomatis serology, hysterosalpingosonography and MR-IRM. In our opinion, laparoscopy is of course indicated in infertility assessments not only when anomalies are revealed by hysterosalpingography but also in the following circumstances: past history of infection (especially a positive Chlamydia antibody blood test) and/or pelvic surgery (a significant risk of adhesions), unexplained secondary infertility, unexplained infertility after the age of 38 (when choosing between artificial insemination and direct enrolment in an IVF programme) and failure of 3 cycles of good-quality intra-uterine inseminations (with ovarian stimulation and a sufficient number of spermatozoids).

The value of medical history taking as risk indicator for tuboperitoneal pathology: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend diagnostic laparoscopy in subfertile women with known co-morbidities in their medical history. Aggregated evidence underpinning these recommendations is, however, currently lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence on the association between items reported during medical history taking and tuboperitoneal pathology.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE (from 1966 to May 2007), EMBASE (from 1960 to January 2007) and bibliographies of retrieved primary articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant studies that compared medical history with the presence or absence of tubal pathology.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies comparing medical history with the presence or absence of tubal pathology were included. A diagnosis of tubal pathology had to be made by hysterosalpingography, laparoscopy or a combination of both. In the absence of invasive tubal testing, tuboperitoneal pathology was considered to be absent in case of intrauterine pregnancy. Homogeneity between studies was assessed, and the association between medical history and tubal pathology was expressed as a common odds ratio with a 95% CI. No language restriction was applied.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies. In cohort studies, strong associations were found for a history of complicated appendicitis (OR 7.2, 95% CI 2.2-22.8), pelvic surgery (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.4-9.0) and pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.6), and in case-control studies, for a history of complicated appendicitis (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.8-6.3), PID (OR 5.5, 95% CI 2.7-11.0), ectopic pregnancy (OR 16.0, 95% CI 12.5-20.4), endometriosis (OR 5.9, 95% CI 3.2-10.8) and sexually transmitted disease (OR 11.9, 95% CI 4.3-33.3).

AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS

Subfertile women reporting a history of PID, complicated appendicitis, pelvic surgery, ectopic pregnancy and endometriosis are at increased risk of having tuboperitoneal pathology. In these women, diagnostic laparoscopy should be offered early in the fertility work-up.

Tubal flushing for subfertility

BACKGROUND

A possible therapeutic effect of diagnostic tubal patency testing has been debated in the literature for half a century. Further debate surrounds whether oil-soluble or water-soluble contrast media might have the bigger fertility-enhancing effect.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of flushing a woman's fallopian tubes with oil- or water-soluble contrast media on subsequent fertility outcomes in couples with infertility.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's specialised register of trials (searched 31 January 2007), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstract and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials comparing tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media or tubal flushing with water-soluble media or with no treatment in women with subfertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected adverse effects information from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials involving 2079 participants were included. Tubal flushing with oil-soluble media versus no intervention was associated with a significant increase in the odds of live birth (Peto OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.40 to 6.37) and of pregnancy (Peto OR 3.30, 95% CI 2.00 to 5.43). For the comparison of tubal flushing with oil-soluble media versus tubal flushing with water-soluble media, the increase in the odds of live birth for tubal flushing with oil-soluble versus water-soluble media (Peto OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.11) was based on two trials where statistical heterogeneity was present and the higher quality trial showed no significant difference; there was no evidence of a significant difference in the odds of pregnancy (Peto OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.54). The addition of oil-soluble media to flushing with water-soluble media showed no evidence of a significant difference in the odds of pregnancy (Peto OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.79) or live birth (Peto OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.77). There were no serious adverse event reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of effectiveness of tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media in increasing the odds of pregnancy and live birth versus no intervention. Future robust randomised trials, comparing oil-soluble versus water-soluble media, water-soluble media versus no intervention and tubal flushing versus established treatments for infertility would be a useful further guide to clinical practice.

Tubal flushing for subfertility

BACKGROUND

A possible therapeutic effect of diagnostic tubal patency testing has been debated in the literature for half a century. Further debate surrounds whether oil-soluble or water-soluble contrast media might have the bigger fertility-enhancing effect. Historically a variety of agents have been used to 'flush' the fallopian tubes, although tubal flushing does not currently form part of routine practice in the treatment of fertility delay.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of flushing a woman's fallopian tubes with oil- or water-soluble contrast media on subsequent fertility outcomes in couples with infertility.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's specialised register of trials (searched 2 March 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to Mar 2004), EMBASE (1980 to Mar 2004), Biological Abstract (1980 to Mar 2004) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials where tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media or tubal flushing with water-soluble media was compared with one another or with no treatment were considered for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eleven randomised controlled trials were identified and included in this review. All trials were assessed for quality criteria. The studied primary outcome was live birth (and ongoing pregnancy), with secondary outcomes pregnancy, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, treatment complications including pain, intravasation of contrast medium, infection and haemorrhage, and image quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Tubal flushing with oil-soluble media versus no intervention (three trials including 381 participants) was associated with a significant increase in the odds of live birth (Peto OR 2.98, 95%CI 1.40 to 6.37) and of pregnancy (Peto OR 3.30, 95%CI 2.00 to 5.43). There were no data from RCTs to assess tubal flushing with water-soluble media versus no intervention. For the comparison of tubal flushing with oil-soluble media versus tubal flushing with water-soluble media (six trials including 1,483 participants), the increase in the odds of live birth for tubal flushing with oil-soluble versus water-soluble media (Peto OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.05 to 2.11) was based on two trials where statistical heterogeneity was present and the higher quality trial showed no significant difference; there was no evidence of a significant difference in the odds of pregnancy (Peto OR 1.24, 95%CI 0.97 to 1.57). The addition of oil-soluble media to flushing with water-soluble media (water-soluble plus oil-soluble media versus water-soluble media alone; three trials including 555 participants) showed no evidence of a significant difference in the odds of pregnancy (Peto OR 1.18, 95%CI 0.82 to 1.70) or live birth (Peto OR 1.06, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.77). Adverse event data were only available for the comparison OSCM versus WSCM: OSCM carried a significantly higher chance of intravasation (Peto OR 5.41, 95%CI 2.57 to 11.37) but a significantly lower chance of immediate pain (Peto OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.84), prolonged pain (Peto OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.15 to 0.45) and post-procedure bleeding (Peto OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.15 to 0.31), and no serious adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of effectiveness of tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media in increasing the odds of pregnancy and live birth versus no intervention. The limited evidence of an increase in the odds of live birth from tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media versus water-soluble contrast media must be interpreted cautiously. Further robust randomised trials, comparing oil-soluble versus water-soluble media and comparing water-soluble media versus no intervention, would be a useful further guide to clinical practice. Further research is merited to ascertain the mechanism of the fertility enhancing effect of oil-soluble media, as to whether this is a 'tubal flushing' phenomenon, an effect on the intraperitoneal environment, or an implantation enhancing effect on the endometrium.

A Review of the Use of Lipiodol Flushing for Unexplained Infertility

There has been speculation for decades regarding the role of flushing women's fallopian tubes in improving the chance of pregnancy. More recent evidence has highlighted a possible specific role for lipiodol (ethiodized oil), an oil-soluble contrast medium, in the enhancement of fertility by these means. This systematic review was designed to assess the effectiveness of tubal flushing with various contrast media in improving the chance of pregnancy. The review was performed using Cochrane guidelines, including only data from randomized controlled trials. Results confirm the effectiveness of flushing with lipiodol in improving the chance of pregnancy and live birth. Although there was limited evidence to suggest a possible benefit of oil- over water-soluble contrast media, the answer to this question remains unclear. The specific groups who appear to benefit most from lipiodol flushing are couples with unexplained infertility, but particularly couples where the woman has endometriosis in the context of normal patent fallopian tubes. As a simple, low-cost, minimally invasive intervention that carries a low risk of complications and no increased risk of multiple pregnancy, lipiodol flushing may prove an appealing alternative to established fertility treatments for many couples.

Clinical history is the essence of medicine

Taking a history is useful in the evaluation of women with tubal factor infertility. A clinical history also predicts those women who will benefit from surgical therapy.

The limited clinical usefulness of taking a history in the evaluation of women with tubal factor infertility

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether patient histories of gynecological infections predict tubal pathology seen at laparoscopic exam in infertile women.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis from a subset of case-control subjects.

SETTING

Tertiary-level public hospitals with infertility clinics, Mexico City.

PATIENT(S)

Three hundred twenty-one nulligravid infertile women seeking diagnostic workup.

INTERVENTION(S)

Interviews conducted before evaluation by laparoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES(S)

Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for correlating previous pelvic inflammatory disease symptoms, vaginal discharge, genital tract infections, and antibodies to Chlamydia trachomatis to confirmed diagnoses of tubal pathology and to severe tubal pathology.

RESULT(S)

Tubal pathology was found in 58% of participants (n = 185), and severe pathology was found in 29% (n = 92). None of the historical infection-related factors alone was a good overall predictor of tubal pathology; high sensitivity values (up to 73%) were offset by low specificity (down to 30%) and vice versa, for each factor. When considered simultaneously, the factors improved the overall predictive ability just slightly (84% sensitivity and 29% specificity) over the individual factors. The validity measures did not improve when examining severe tubal pathology alone.

CONCLUSION(S)

History taking related to past genital tract infections appears to be of little use in the evaluation of infertile women.

Relationships between Chlamydia trachomatis Antibody Titers and Tubal Pathology Assessed using Transvaginal Hydrolaparoscopy in Infertile Women

PROBLEM

Since transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy (THL) was introduced as the first-line procedure in the early stages of the exploration of the adnexal structures in infertile women, it has been shown that THL is a less traumatic and a more suitable outpatient procedure than diagnostic laparoscopy. This study was performed to investigate the relationships between Chlamydia trachomatis antibody titers and tubal pathology assessed using THL in infertile women.

METHODS

The C. trachomatis antibody titers (IgG and IgA) were evaluated by ELISA. The posterior of the uterus and the tubo-ovarian structures were carefully observed, and tubal passage using indigocarmine was confirmed using THL. THL was carried out in 32 infertile women having C. trachomatis antibody in their sera between May 1999 and October 2001. Unilateral salpingectomy had been performed on two of the 32 patients.

RESULTS

Tubal occlusion was confirmed in 20 (32.3%) of the 62 tubes, while peritubal adhesion was diagnosed in 37 (59.7%) of the 62 tubes. Using receiver operating characteristics curves, the cut-off value of C. trachomatis IgG antibody titer to predict tubal occlusion was determined to be 3.55. Tubal occlusion was observed in 16 (51.6%) of the 31 tubes in patients with the C. trachomatis IgG antibody titer of more than 3.55, which was significantly higher in four (12.9%) of the 31 tubes having the antibody titer less than 3.55 (P = 0.004). However, there was no correlation between C. trachomatis IgG antibody titer and peritubal adhesion. As for C. trachomatis IgA antibody titer, there was no correlation between antibody titer and tubal occlusion or peritubal adhesion.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that C. trachomatis infection is significantly associated with tubal pathology. Although the cut-off value of C. trachomatis IgG antibody titer to predict the existence of tubal occlusion was shown to be 3.55, we would suggest that THL or standard laparoscopy is performed to consider appropriate treatments in patients with past C. trachomatis infection because of the high prevalence of peritubal adhesion.

Comparison of serological assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies in different groups of obstetrical and gynecological patients

New serological enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) were compared with microimmunofluorescence (MIF) as a "gold standard" to detect Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies in different groups of obstetrical, gynecological, and subfertile patients. There were no significant differences in seroprevalence rates, except for the group of C. trachomatis-positive patients (P < 0.01). Test characteristics were calculated for Chlamydia-EIA (Biologische Analysensystem GmbH, Lich, Germany) and pELISA (Medac, Wedel, Germany). pELISA seems to be a good alternative to MIF. It has high specificity and is easier to perform.

Female subfertility

With an average monthly fecundity rate of only 20%, human beings are not fertile mammals. 10-15% of couples have difficulties conceiving, or conceiving the number of children they want, and seek specialist fertility care at least once during their reproductive lifetime. Dependent on the two main factors that determine subfertility, duration of childlessness and age of the woman, three questions need to be addressed before treatment is offered. Is it time to start the routine fertility investigation?--ie, has sufficient exposure to the chance of conception taken place? Are cost-effective, safe, and reliable treatments available for the disorder diagnosed? And, should the couple be referred straightaway for assisted reproduction?

Chlamydia trachomatis in subfertile women undergoing uterine instrumentation. The clinician's role

Most women attending a fertility clinic will undergo uterine instrumentation either diagnostically and/or therapeutically. This places them at potential risk of chlamydial pelvic inflammatory disease. Clinicians remain unclear about the roles of screening, serology and prophylactic antibiotics. A review of the evidence suggests that women <25 years and those older with risk factors, men with risk factors and gamete donors should have their lower genital tract screened for Chlamydia trachomatis by a sensitive test. More information is required before screening men by age can be recommended. Serology in its present form cannot be advocated as a screening tool. Those women with a past history of chlamydial morbidity or a diagnosis of tubal pathology should, in addition to screening, be covered with prophylactic antibiotics when undergoing uterine instrumentation. The partner should be screened for sexually transmitted infections. Non-selective use of prophylactic antibiotics serves only to increase the problem of antibiotic resistance and maintain the bacterial load of chlamydia in the community.

Chlamydia trachomatis in subfertile women undergoing uterine instrumentation. How we can help in the avoidance of iatrogenic pelvic inflammatory disease?

Guidelines drawn up for patients undergoing termination of pregnancy state that there should be a protocol for either screening or treating for Chlamydia trachomatis. So far guidelines for other techniques that require instrumentation of the uterus (e.g. hysterosalpingography) remain unclear and controversial. By looking for other less invasive techniques we will be able to avoid these problems in a proportion of cases. Screening or treatment should be performed in those cases requiring uterine instrumentation.