Complete salpingectomy versus tubal ligation during cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE, et al. Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(4):284–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon U, Ryan A, Kalsi J, et al. Risk algorithm using serial biomarker measurements doubles the number of screen-detected cancers compared with a single-threshold rule in the United Kingdom collaborative trial of ovarian cancer screening. JCO. 2015;33(18):2062–2071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, et al. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2011;305(22):2295–2303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal AN, Fraser L, Manchanda R, et al. Results of annual screening in phase I of the United Kingdom familial ovarian cancer screening study highlight the need for strict adherence to screening schedule. JCO. 2013;31(1):49–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karst AM, Levanon K, Drapkin R. Modeling high-grade serous ovarian carcinogenesis from the fallopian tube. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(18):7547–7552.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kindelberger DW, Lee Y, Miron A, et al. Intraepithelial carcinoma of the fimbria and pelvic serous carcinoma: evidence for a causal relationship. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(2):161–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao FF, Bhargava R, Yang H, et al. Clinicopathologic study of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma with invasive carcinoma: is serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma a reliable feature for determining the organ of origin? Hum Pathol. 2013;44(8):1534–1543.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erickson BK, Conner MG, Landen CN. The role of the fallopian tube in the origin of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):409–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crum CP, Drapkin R, Miron A, et al. The distal fallopian tube: a new model for pelvic serous carcinogenesis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19(1):3–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurman RJ, Shih IM. The origin and pathogenesis of epithelial ovarian cancer: a proposed unifying theory. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(3):433–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee Opinion No. 774: opportunistic salpingectomy as a strategy for epithelial ovarian cancer prevention. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(4):e279–e284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker JL, Powell CB, Chen LM, et al. Society of Gynecologic Oncology recommendations for the prevention of ovarian cancer. Cancer. 2015;121(13):2108–2120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia C, Martin M, Tucker LY, et al. Experience with opportunistic salpingectomy in a Large, community-based health system in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(2):277–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAlpine JN, Hanley GE, Woo MMM, et al. Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(5):471.e1–471.11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minig L, Chuang L, Patrono MG, et al. Surgical outcomes and complications of prophylactic salpingectomy at the time of benign hysterectomy in premenopausal women. J Minim Invas Gynecol. 2015;22(4):653–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vorwergk J, Radosa MP, Nicolaus K, et al. Prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy (PBS) to reduce ovarian cancer risk incorporated in standard premenopausal hysterectomy: complications and re-operation rate. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014;140(5):859–865.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Siesto G, et al. Infectious morbidity after total laparoscopic hysterectomy: does concomitant salpingectomy make a difference?. BJOG. 2009;116(4):589–593.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):1–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell CB, Alabaster A, Simmons S, et al. Salpingectomy for sterilization: change in practice in a large integrated health care system, 2011–2016. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(5):961–967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danis RB, Della Badia CR, Richard SD. Postpartum permanent sterilization: could bilateral salpingectomy replace bilateral tubal ligation? J Minim Invas Gynecol. 2016;23(6):928–932.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ida T, Fujiwara H, Matsubara S, et al. Salpingectomy for tubal sterilization at cesarean section: no extra time and no extra bleeding compared with tubal ligation. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2017;44:879–881.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinar S, Ashwal E, Blecher Y, et al. Bilateral salpingectomy vs tubal ligation for permanent sterilization during a cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(1):S415–S416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganer Herman H, Gluck O, Keidar R, et al. Ovarian reserve following cesarean section with salpingectomy vs tubal ligation: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(4):472.e1–472.e6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subramaniam A, Blanchard CT, Erickson BK, et al. Feasibility of complete salpingectomy compared with standard postpartum tubal ligation at cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(1):20–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parikh P, Kim S, Torbenson V, et al. Safety of salpingectomy at time of cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1):S329–S330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehn K, Gu L, Creinin MD, et al. Successful completion of total and partial salpingectomy at the time of cesarean delivery. Contraception. 2018;98(3):232–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339(1):b2700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of cohort studies; 2010 [cited 10 Sep 2018]. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/nosgen.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–2012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia C, Moskowitz OM, Chisholm CA, et al. Salpingectomy compared with tubal ligation atcesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(1):29–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rice MS, Hankinson SE, Tworoger SS. Tubal ligation, hysterectomy, unilateral oophorectomy, and risk of ovarian cancer in the Nurses’ Health Studies. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):192–198.e3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cibula D, Widschwendter M, Májek O, et al. Tubal ligation and the risk of ovarian cancer: review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(1):55–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lessard-Anderson CR, Handlogten KS, Molitor RJ, et al. Effect of tubal sterilization technique on risk of serous epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(3):423–427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falconer H, Yin L, Grönberg H, et al. Ovarian cancer risk after salpingectomy: a nationwide population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(2):dju410.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hanley GE, McAlpine JN, Pearce CL, et al. The performance and safety of bilateral salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):270.e1–270.e9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morelli M, Venturella R, Mocciaro R, et al. Prophylactic salpingectomy in premenopausal low-risk women for ovarian cancer: primum non nocere. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;129(3):448–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Findley AD, Siedhoff MT, Hobbs KA, et al. Short-term effects of salpingectomy during laparoscopic hysterectomy on ovarian reserve: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(6):1704–1708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venturella R, Lico D, Borelli M, et al. 3 to 5 years later: long-term effects of prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy on ovarian function. J Minim Invas Gynecol. 2017;24(1):145–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin F, Du DF, Li XL. The effect of salpingectomy on ovarian reserve and ovarian function. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2016;71(6):369–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye XP, Yang YZ, Sun XX. A retrospective analysis of the effect of salpingectomy on serum antiMullerian hormone level and ovarian reserve. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(1):53.e1–53.10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth AJ, Baumgarten SC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, et al. Tubal ligation and age at natural menopause. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(6):1247–1254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh KK, Clark LH, Stamilio DM. Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy vs tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(1):106.e1–106.e10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subramaniam A, Einerson BD, Blanchard CT, et al. The cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy versus standard tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery for ovarian cancer risk reduction. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;152(1):127–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar