Hydrosalpinx: Tubal surgery or in vitro fertilisation? An everlasting dilemma nowadays; a narrative review

Aris Daniilidis, Dimitrios Balaouras, Dimitrios Chitzios, Theodoros Theodoridis, E. Assimakopoulos
In: Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · 2017 · vol. 37(5) , pp. 550–556 · doi:10.1080/01443615.2017.1287685 · PMID:28325120 · W2601298190
review OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 3 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

The decision on how to treat tubal diseases, specifically hydrosalpinx, is a difficult one. Ιt involves surgical, medical, social, emotional and economic factors. This narrative review aims to increase awareness of tubal disease diagnosis and treatment, to compare between tubal surgery and in vitro fertilisation (IVF) for tubal factor infertility, and to investigate the effect of the combination of both. This way, we can be more effective, safe and provide our patients with better treatment results. The review analysed randomised studies, trials and meta-analysis, which give new aspects on the treatment methods for tubal pathology before IVF. Recent papers published in English have been studied, alongside guidelines and committee opinions from previous years. Tubal surgery and IVF aim to exploit a woman's reproductive potential. IVF and endoscopic tubal surgery must be thought of as complementary, rather than competing techniques in tubal disease cases, in order to improve fertility outcome. The first-line treatment for young women less than 35 years old with minor tubal pathology, is tubal surgery. IVF should be offered if there are other factors in a couple's subfertility, if the patient is >38 years old, if moderate to severe tubal disease is present, and if it has been more than 12 months post-surgery.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

infertility

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (47)

Cited by (3)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-06-04T02:00:05.705006+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK