Sterilization reversal Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Artigos Originais

    Tubal reanastomosis: analysis of the results of 30 years of treatment

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2008;30(6):294-299

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Tubal reanastomosis: analysis of the results of 30 years of treatment

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2008;30(6):294-299

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032008000600005

    Views5

    PURPOSE: to verify the ratio of intra-uterine gestation in patients submitted to recanalization in the Hospital Regional da Asa Sul in the last 30 years and to assess the rate of ectopic gestation of such procedures, the influence of age and time interval between salpingectomy and recanalization in the therapeutic success. METHODS: medical files of 71 patients were analyzed, after exclusion of those presenting other alterations that could influence fertility prognosis, plus the cases when recanalization was impossible. Variables collected were: occurrence of intra-uterine gestation, coming to term or to abortion; occurrence of ectopic pregnancy after salpingectomy; no-conception after reversion, women's age at the recanalization, and time interval between salpingectomy and its reversion. RESULTS: there has been a pregnancy rate of 67.6%, 73.2% for bilateral recanalization and 46.6% for unilateral, as well as 5.6% of ectopic pregnancies. Concerning the patients' age group, it was observed a pregnancy rate of 33%, from 20 to 24; 60%, from 25 to 29; 69.2%, from 30 to 34; 65%, from 35 to 39, and 42.9%, from 40 to 44 years old. The number of cases was small for age the groups 20 to 24 and 40 to 44 years old. The time interval between salpingectomy and recanalization (TISR) has varied from one to 18 years. TISR has been divided in three groups presenting the following pregnancy rates: one to six year interval, 59%; seven to 12, 66.6%; 13 to 18, 57%. CONCLUSIONS: gestation rate has been 67.6%, 5.6% being ectopic. In the comparison of age groups, there has been no significant influence of age on the therapeutic success of patients from 25 to 39 years old. Sterility duration did not influence the reversion results.

    See more
    Tubal reanastomosis: analysis of the results of 30 years of treatment
  • Artigos Originais

    Factors associated with the reproductive future of patients wishing pregnancy after being submitted to tubal ligation

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2007;29(5):230-234

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Factors associated with the reproductive future of patients wishing pregnancy after being submitted to tubal ligation

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2007;29(5):230-234

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032007000500002

    Views6

    PURPOSE: to analyze the factors associated with the reproductive future of patients wishing to become pregnant after having being submitted to tubal ligation (TL), attended at a public service. METHODS: a prospective study including 98 patients previously submitted to TL, who came to the Human Reproduction Center of the University Hospital of Brasilia (HUB), from January 1996 to January 2004, wishing to become pregnant again These patients were followed up from their first appointment till the end of the study, when they answered a structured questionnaire about the social demographic aspects at both the moment they asked for the TL and the reversion of the procedure. RESULTS: the patients’ average age at the TL procedure was 25 years old. Among them, 55.1% were younger than 25, 46.9% had three or more children, and ten of them had only one child. The most common reasons for the TL procedure were: contraception (48%), financial difficulties (25.5%) and marital problems (15.3%). The major causes for wishing a new pregnancy were: a new relationship/marriage (80.6%), the desire of having another child with the same partner (8.2%), and the death of a child (6.1%). The regret time informed by most of the patients was between two and four years, and the search for reversion was between six and ten years. About 83.6% of the sample referred lack of information about the procedure and the difficulties of reversion. Twenty patients were submitted to TL reversal procedure; from the ten who became pregnant, only six delivered babies, after a full-term pregnancy. Eight patients were referred to in vitro fertilization treatment, four of them became pregnant and two delivered healthy babies. CONCLUSIONS: TL in young vulnerable women, not informed about the definitive condition of the method, may increase the search for attended reproduction services and impair their reproductive future, as far as only 8.1% of the sample delivered babies and reached their goal.

    See more

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
correction
editorial
letter
other
rapid-communication
research-article
review-article
Section
Arigos Originais
Article
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
FEBRASGO POSITION STATEMENT
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE