Post-partum tubal ligation at time of cesarean delivery or via laparoscopy as an interval sterilization has similar effects on ovarian reserve
- PMID: 30362334
- PMCID: PMC7075397
- DOI: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2018.2018.0087
Post-partum tubal ligation at time of cesarean delivery or via laparoscopy as an interval sterilization has similar effects on ovarian reserve
Abstract
Objective: To observe and compare the effect of postpartum tubal ligation (TL) procedures on ovarian reserve at women desiring TL as a contraceptive method at the end of pregnancy.
Material and methods: Eighty-one women were included in the prospective study. TL was performed at the time of cesarean delivery (CD) (n=49) and as an interval procedure by laparoscopy (LS) in the postpartum period (n=32). Anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) was used to determine ovarian reserve. Blood samples were taken twice from each subject; the first sample was taken before delivery from all subjects and the second sample was taken 4 months after sterilization. AMH level differences were compared in each group and between groups.
Results: The preoperative AMH values of CD and LS groups were similar 2.30 (maximum: 5.20, minimum: 0.42) ng/mL and 1.80 (maximum: 3.50, minimum: 0.40) ng/mL, respectively (p=0.262). The postoperative AMH values of the CD and LS groups were 1.30 (maximum: 2.60, minimum: 0.30) ng/mL and 0.90 (maximum: 2.50, minimum: 0.20) ng/mL, respectively (p=0.284). When the preoperative and postoperative values of each group were compared the change was statistically significant for both groups p<0.001. The decrease in mean AMH values in the CD and LS groups were 37.83% and 44.15%, respectively. The percentage changes of AMH values were not statistically significant (p=0.286).
Conclusion: TL at the time of CD and interval sterilization with LS have similar effects on ovarian reserve.
Keywords: Tubal ligation; ovarian reserve; cesarean section; laparoscopy; anti-müllerian hormone.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
References
-
- Zite N, Borrero S. Female sterilization in the United States. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16:336–40. - PubMed
-
- Peterson Herbert B, Pollack Army E, Warshaw Jeffrey S. Tubal sterilization. In: Rock JA, Jones HW, editors. Te Lindes's Operative Gynecology 9th edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2003;. p.:537–56.
-
- Hillis SD, Marchbanks PA, Tylor LR, Peterson HB. Higher hysterectomy risk for sterilized than nonsterilized women: findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization. The U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91:241–6. - PubMed
-
- Peterson HB, Jeng G, Folger SG, Hillis SA, Marchbanks PA, Wilcox LS, et al. The risk of menstrual abnormalities after tubal sterilization. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1681–7. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources