Comparison of Pregnancy Outcome between Ultrasound- Guided Tubal Recanalization and Office-Based Microhysteroscopic Ostial Dilatation in Patients with Proximal Blocked Tubes.

BACKGROUND

The current research to the best of my knowledge is the first to compare the pregnancy outcome between ultrasound-guided tubal recanalization (UGTR) using a special fallopian tubal catheter, and office-based micrhysteroscopic ostial dilatation (MHOD) using the same tubal catherter in infertile women with previously diagnosed bilateral proximal tubal obstruction (PTO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study reported the pregnancy outcomes for 200 women in private infertility care center in Arafa hospital in Fayoum and in El Minya University Hospital in the period between January 2010 and October 2013 treated as outpatients for their bilateral PTO after the routine hysterosalpingography (HSG). A Cook's catheter, special fallopian tubal catheter, were used to recanalize the blocked tubes in 100 women (group A) under UGTR, and the same Cook's tubal catheter was used through 2mm microhysteroscope to cannulate both ostia using MHOD in another 100 women (group B). Pregnancy outcome was determined after the procedures for a 12-month period follow-up.

RESULTS

The number of the recanalization of PTO was not significantly different between two groups. As of the 200 blocked fallopian tubes in group A, 140 tubes (70%) were successfully recanalized by passing the ultrasound-guided special cannula, while 150 tubes (75%) were successfully recanalized in group B, using the same tubal catheter through a 2mm microhysteroscope. The cumulative pregnancy rate after the two procedures was not statistically different between two groups. It was 25.9% in group A, while it was 26.3% in group B, after a 12-month period follow-up.

CONCLUSION

UGTR is highly recommended as the first step to manage infertile women due to PTO, as it is easier procedure; however, there is possible to obtain nearly similar results after MHOD.