Published in:
01-11-2018 | Correspondence
Salpingectomy compared with tubal ligation during cesarean delivery
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 5/2018
Login to get accessExcerpt
We read with interest the paper “Total bilateral salpingectomy versus partial bilateral salpingectomy for permanent sterilization during cesarean delivery” by Shinar et al. [1]. The researchers reviewed the medical files in hospital computerized database and compared patients who underwent bilateral tubal ligation with those who underwent total salpingectomy at the time of cesarean section. They found no differences with regard to cesarean duration time or incidence of surgery time more than 45 min, and the median length of operation was equal in the comparison groups (35 min). However, we found that the total surgery time of cesarean section plus salpingectomy or tubal ligation was significantly less when compared with other relative studies [2‐9] (Table 1). Furthermore, Shinar et al. [1] defined the cesarean section duration more than 45 min (greater than 75th percentile) as adverse outcome, and there were only 11 (22.0%) patients in total bilateral salpingectomy and 27 (27.3%) patients in partial bilateral salpingectomy undergoing that adverse outcome.
Table 1
Comparison of cesarean delivery duration between salpingectomy and tubal ligation groups
|
Salpingectomy (min)
|
Tubal ligation (min)
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
Shinar et al. [1]
|
35 (26, 52.5)
|
35 (30, 45)
|
|
Danis et al. [2]
|
71.44 ± 5.81
|
59.13 ± 16.0
|
|
Ida et al. [3]
|
68.5a
|
65.0a
|
|
Shinar et al. [4]
|
45.6 ± 23.5
|
44.2 ± 23.5
|
|
Ganer Herman et al. [5]
|
66.0 ± 20.5
|
52.3 ± 15.8
|
|
Powell et al. [6]
|
61.5 (47, 76)
|
52 (42, 65)
|
|
Garcia et al. [7]
|
60 (53, 71)
|
68 (59, 76)
|
|
Subramaniam et al. [8]
|
75.4 ± 29.1
|
60.0 ± 23.3
|
|
Parikh et al. [9]
|
57.0 (48.3, 66.6)
|
47.2 (43.6, 55.1)
|