Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27809927›Full record

SynthesisJournal of ovarian research2016

Salpingectomy before assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic literature review.

Marco Noventa, Salvatore Gizzo, Carlo Saccardi, Shara Borgato, Amerigo Vitagliano, Michela Quaranta, Pietro Litta, Michele Gangemi, Guido Ambrosini, Donato D'Antona and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of ovarian research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marco NoventaDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Salvatore GizzoDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Carlo SaccardiDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Shara BorgatoDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Amerigo VitaglianoDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Michela QuarantaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NHS Trust - Northampton General Hospital, Northampton, United Kingdom.
Pietro LittaDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Michele GangemiDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Guido AmbrosiniDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Donato D'AntonaDepartment of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Stefano PalombaUnit of Reproductive Surgery and Medicine, ASMN-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy. stefanopalomba@tin.it.
University of Padua · ITAzienda Sanitaria Unità Locale di Reggio Emilia · ITNorthampton General Hospital NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Salpingectomy is largely used in case of hydrosalpinx in infertile women scheduled for assisted reproductive technologies (ART), whereas there is no consensus on its role in absence of hydrosalpinx. The current is a systematic literature review to collate all available evidence regarding salpingectomy as fertility enhancement procedure before ART in infertile patients. Our primary endpoint was to assess the impact of the surgical procedure on ovarian reserve, and secondary outcomes were to evaluate its benefits and harms on ART outcomes. We identified 29 papers of which 16 reporting data on the impact of tubal surgery on ovarian reserve and 24 (11 previously included) on ART outcomes. Available data suggested an absence of variation in ovarian reserve markers after unilateral salpingectomy while contradictory results were reported for bilateral surgery. Considering ART outcomes, data reported a significant improvement in ongoing pregnancy/live-birth rate in treated subjects without significant reduction in ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation. In case of tubal disease, a surgical approach based on unilateral salpingectomy may be considered safe, without negative effects on ovarian reserve and ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation whilst having a positive effect on pregnancy rate. Data regarding bilateral salpingectomy and ovarian reserve are conflicting. Further trials are needed to confirm both the benefits of salpingectomy before ART and the safety of bilateral salpingectomy on ovarian reserve, and to clarify the role of uni- or bilateral surgery in case of tubal blockage without hydrosalpinx.

Indexed as

Reproductive Techniques, AssistedSalpingectomyAnti-Mullerian HormoneBiomarkersFemaleFollicle Stimulating HormoneHumansOvarian ReserveOvulation InductionPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePregnancy RateTreatment OutcomeAnti-Mullerian HormoneBiomarkersFollicle Stimulating HormoneAssisted reproductionHydrosalpinxInfertilityOvarian reserveSalpingectomy

Identifiers

PMID27809927
PMCPMC5094031
OpenAlexW2546476803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.