Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:21:41.469Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - The Future of Operative Laparoscopy for Infertility

from PART II - INFERTILITY EVALUATION AND TREATMENT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

By
Camran Nezhat  and
Bulent Berker
Edited by
Botros R. M. B. Rizk ,
Juan A. Garcia-Velasco ,
Hassan N. Sallam  and
Antonis Makrigiannakis
Botros R. M. B. Rizk
Affiliation:
University of South Alabama
Juan A. Garcia-Velasco
Affiliation:
Rey Juan Carlos University School of Medicine,
Hassan N. Sallam
Affiliation:
University of Alexandria School of Medicine
Antonis Makrigiannakis
Affiliation:
University of Crete
Get access

Summary

CURRENT TRENDS

There is little consensus regarding the composition of the ideal evaluation of the couple experiencing infertility. Validation of the most cost-effective, productive, and minimally invasive means of completing the infertility evaluation is an evolving art requiring a critical eye, willingness to learn new techniques, and a desire to best serve the interests of our patients. A diagnosis of unexplained infertility is usually made only after it has been demonstrated that the female partner ovulates regularly, has patent Fallopian tubes, shows no evidence of peritubal adhesions, fibroids or endometriosis, and has a partner with normal sperm production and function. Only when all standard clinical investigations yield normal results should the diagnosis of unexplained infertility be raised (1). This means that for an optimal evaluation of an infertile woman, optimal assessment of the morphology of the pelvic cavity, uterus, and the tubes demands the utilization of laparoscopy. The principal options for the evaluation of the morphology of the uterus and tubes are hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy with hydrotubation. The two techniques are complementary, but there is considerable pressure to simplify the investigation and the cost/benefit calculation tends to favor hysterosalpingography (2). Whereas, one should keep in mind that, in infertile couples, laparoscopy reveals abnormal findings in twenty one to sixty eight percent of cases with a normal HSG (3).

Keywords

artificial reproductive technologydiagnostic laparoscopyendometriosishydrosalpinxleiomyomaoperative laparoscopyinfertility
Type
Chapter
Information
Infertility and Assisted Reproduction , pp. 107 - 114
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Fatum, M, Laufer, N, Simon, A. Investigation of the infertile couple: should diagnostic laparoscopy be performed after normal hysterosalpingography in treating infertility suspected to be of unknown origin?Hum Reprod 2002;17(1):1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosignani, PG, Rubin, BL. Optimal use of infertility diagnostic tests and treatments. The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Hum Reprod 2000;15(3):723–32.Google ScholarPubMed
Corson, SL, Cheng, A, Gutmann, JN. Laparoscopy in the “normal” infertile patient: a question revisited. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2000;7(3):317–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Surrey, ES. Endoscopy in the evaluation of the woman experiencing infertility. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000;43(4):889–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Littman, ED, Lathi, RB, Berker, B, Westphal, LM, Giudice, LC, Milki, AA. The dilemma of endometriosis: is consensus possible with an enigma?Fertil Steril 2005;84(6):1587–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, RA, Gibson, KA, Wu, YW, Croughan, MS. Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103(3):551–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elster, N. Less is more: the risks of multiple births. The Institute for Science, Law, and Technology Working Group on Reproductive Technology. Fertil Steril 2000;74(4):617–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centers for Disease Control. 1997 assisted reproductive technology success rates, national summary and fertility clinic reports, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta (1999).
Ayres, A, Johnson, TR. Management of multiple pregnancy: prenatal care-part I. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2005;60(8):527–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, M, Bower, C, Milne, E, Klerk, N, Kurinczuk, JJ. Assisted reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects—a systematic review. Hum Reprod 2005;20(2):328–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ness, RB, Cramer, DW, Goodman, MT. Infertility, fertility drugs, and ovarian cancer a pooled analysis of case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155:217–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parazzini, F, Pelucchi, C, Negri, E, Franceschi, S, Talamini, R, Montella, M. Use of fertility drugs and risk of ovarian cancer. Hum Reprod 2001;16:1372–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kashyap, S, Moher, D, Fung, MF, Rosenwaks, Z. Assisted reproductive technology and the incidence of ovarian cancer a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:785–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahdavi, A, Pejovic, T, Nezhat, F. Induction of ovulation and ovarian cancer: a critical review of the literature. Fertil Steril 2006;85(4):819–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Winer, WK, Cooper, JD, Nezhat, F, Nezhat, C. Endoscopic infertility surgery. J Reprod Med 1989;34(2):127–34.Google ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Hood, J, Winer, W, Nezhat, F, Crowgey, SR, Garrison, CP. Videolaseroscopy and laser laparoscopy in gynaecology. Br J Hosp Med 1987;38(3):219–24.Google ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Nezhat, F, Nezhat, CH, Admon, D. Videolaseroscopy and videolaparoscopy. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1994;8(4):851–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hovav, Y, Hornstein, E, Almagor, M, Yaffe, C. Diagnostic laparoscopy in primary and secondary infertility. J Assist Reprod Genet 1998;15(9):535–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanahatoe, S, Hompes, PG, Lambalk, CB. Accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy in the infertility work-up before intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 2003;79:361–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capelo, FO, Kumar, A, Steinkampf, MP, Azziz, R. Laparoscopic evaluation following failure to achieve pregnancy after ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate. Fertil Steril 2003;80:1450–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagata, Y, Honjou, K, Sonoda, M, et al. Peri-ovarian adhesions interfere with the diffusion of gonadotrophin into the follicular fluid. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2072–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daniell, JF, Pittaway, , Maxson, WS. The role of laparoscopic adhesiolysis in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril 1983;40:49–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El Sahwi, S. Laparoscopic pelvic adhesiolysis using CO2 laser. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1994;1(4):10–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanahatoe, SJ, Hompes, PG, Lambalk, CB. Investigation of the infertile couple: should diagnostic laparoscopy be performed in the infertility work up programme in patients undergoing intrauterine insemination?Hum Reprod 2003;18(1):8–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Risberg, B. Adhesions: preventive strategies. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:32–9.Google Scholar
Brill, AI, Nezhat, F, Nezhat, CH, Nezhat, C. The incidence of adhesions after prior laparotomy: a laparoscopic appraisal. Obstet Gynecol 1995;85(2):269–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, CR, Nezhat, FR, Metzger, DA, Luciano, AA. Adhesion reformation after reproductive surgery by videolaseroscopy. Fertil Steril 1990;53(6):1008–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansour, R, Aboulghar, M, Serour, GI. Controversies in the surgical management of hydrosalpinx. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2000;12(4):297–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mol, BWJ, Swart, P, Bossuyt, PMM, Beurden, M, Veen, F. Reproducibility of the interpretation of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology. Hum Reprod 1996;11:1204–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swart, P, Mol, BWJ, Veen, F, Beurden, M, Radekop, WK, Bossuyt, PMM. The accuracy of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology, a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 1995;64:486–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeyneloglu, HB, Arici, A, Olive, DL. Adverse effects of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1998;70:492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strandell, A, Lindhard, A, Waldenström, U, et al. Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome: a prospective, randomized multicentre trial in Scandinavia on salpingectomy prior to IVF. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2762–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, MA, Lindheim, SR, Sauer, MV. Hydrosalpinges adversely affect implantation in donor oocyte cycles. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1087–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spielvogel, K, Shwayder, J, Coddington, CC. Surgical management of adhesions, endometriosis, and tubal pathology in the woman with infertility. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000;43(4):916–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shelton, KE, Butler, L, Toner, JP, Oehninger, S, Muasher, SJ. Salpingectomy improves the pregnancy rate in in-vitro fertilization with hydrosalpinx. Hum Reprod 1996;11:523–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, NP, Mak, W, Sowter, MC. Laparoscopic salpingectomy for women with hydrosalpinges enhances the success of IVF: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod 2002;17:543.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Society for Reproductive Medicine Clinical Practice Committee. Salpingectomy for hydrosalpinx prior to in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2006;86(Suppl. 5):S200–1.
Verkauf, BS. Myomectomy for fertility enhancement and preservation. Fertil Steril 1992;58:1–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Eldar-Geva, T, Meagher, S, Healy, DL, MacLachlan, V, Breheny, S, Wood, C. Effect of intramural, subserosal, and submucosal uterine fibroids on the outcome of assisted reproductive technology treatment. Fertil Steril 1998;70:687–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stovall, DW, Parrish, SB, Voorish, BJ, Hahn, SJ, Sparks, AET, Syrop, CH. Uterine leiomyomata reduce the efficacy of assisted reproduction cycles: results of a matched follow-up study. Hum Reprod 1998;13:192–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tulandi, T, Murray, C, Guralnick, M. Adhesion formation and reproductive outcome after myomectomy and second-look laparoscopy. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:213–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Nezhat, F, Silfen, SL. Laparoscopic myomectomy. Int J Fertil 1991;36:275–80.Google ScholarPubMed
Hasson, HM, Rotman, C, Rana, N. Laparoscopic myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:884–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Mais, V, Agossa, S, Guerriero, S, Mascia, M, Solla, E, Melis, GB. Laparoscopic versus abdominal myomectomy: a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate benefits in early outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:654–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubuisson, JB, Fauconnier, A, Chapron, C, Krieker, G, Norgaard, C. Second look after laparoscopic myomectomy. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2102–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Nezhat, F, Bess, O, et al. Laparoscopically assisted myomectomy: a report of a new technique in 57 cases. Int J Fertil 1994;39:34–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Donnez, J, Wyns, C, Nisolle, M. Does ovarian surgery for endometriomas impair the ovarian response to gonadotropin?Fertil Steril 2001;76(4):662–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Crowgey, SR, Garrison, CP. Surgical treatment of endometriosis via laser laparoscopy. Fertil Steril 1986;45(6):778–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hughes, EG, Fedorkow, DM, Collins, JA. Fertil Steril 1993;59:963–70.CrossRef
Parazzini, F. Ablation of lesions or no treatment in minimal-mild endometriosis in infertile women: a randomized trial. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dell'Endometriosi. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1332–4.Google ScholarPubMed
Marcoux, S, Maheux, R, Berube, S. Laparoscopic surgery in infertile women with minimal or mild endometriosis. Canadian Collaborative Group on Endometriosis. N Engl J Med 1997;337:217–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buyalos, RP, Agarwal, SK. Endometriosis-associated infertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2000;12(5):377–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winkel, CA. Evaluation and management of women with endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:397–408.Google ScholarPubMed
Donnez, J, Nisolle, M, Gillet, N, Smets, M, Bassil, S, Casanas-Roux, F. Large ovarian endometriomas. Hum Reprod 1996;11:641–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aboulghar, MA, Mansour, RT, Serour, GI, Al-Inany, HG, Aboulghar, MM. The outcome of in vitro fertilization in advanced endometriosis with previous surgery: a case-controlled study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:371–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nargund, G, Cheng, WC, Parsons, J. The impact of ovarian cystectomy on ovarian response to stimulation during in-vitro fertilization cycles. Hum Reprod 1996;11:81–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, HY, Lee, RK, Hwu, YM, Lin, MH, Su, JT, Tsai, YC. Poor response of ovaries with endometrioma previously treated with cystectomy to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. J Assist Reprod Genet 2002;19:507–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somigliana, E, Ragni, G, Benedetti, F, Borroni, R, Vegetti, W, Crosignani, PG. Does laparoscopic excision of endometriotic ovarian cysts significantly affect ovarian reserve? Insights from IVF cycles. Hum Reprod 2003;18(11):2450–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loh, FH, Tan, AT, Kumar, J, Ng, SC. Ovarian response after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy for endometriotic cysts in 132 monitored cycles. Fertil Steril 1999;72:316–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muzii, L, Bianchi, A, Croce, C, Manci, N, Panici, PB. Laparoscopic excision of ovarian cysts: is the stripping technique a tissue- sparing procedure?Fertil Steril 2002;77:609–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnhart, K, Dunsmoor-Su, R, Coutifaris, C. Effect of endometriosis on in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2002;77(6):1148–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elsheikh, A, Milingos, S, Loutradis, D, Kallipolitis, G, Michalas, S. Endometriosis and reproductive disorders. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2003;997:247–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Surrey, ES, Schoolcraft, WB. Does surgical management of endometriosis within 6 months of an in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer cycle improve outcome?J Assist Reprod Genet 2003; 20:365–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia-Velasco, JA, Majutte, NG, Corona, J, Zuniga, V, Giles, J, Arici, A, et al. Removal of endometriomas before in vitro fertilization does not improve fertility outcomes a matched, case-control study. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1194–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strandell, A. Surgery in contemporary infertility. Curr Womens Health Rep 2003;3:367–74.Google ScholarPubMed
Brosens, I. Endometriosis and the outcome of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1198–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nezhat, C, Siegler, A, Nezhat, F, Nezhat, C, Seidman, D, Luciano, A. Laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis. In Nezhat, C (Editor), Operative Gynecologic Laparoscopy Principles and Techniques (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000; 169–209.Google Scholar
Nezhat, F, Nezhat, C, Allan, CJ, Metzger, DA, Sears, DL. A clinical and histologic classification of endometriomas implications for a mechanism of pathogenesis. J Reprod Med 1992;37:771–6.Google ScholarPubMed
The Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Endometriosis and infertility. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1441–6.
Littman, E, Giudice, L, Lathi, R, Berker, B, Milki, A, Nezhat, C. Role of laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis in patients with failed in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 2005;84(6): 1574–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×