STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fertility outcome and benefit of laparoscopic tubal @entity254 compared with laparotomy. DESIGN: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: University hospital. @entity1 : Eighty-one @entity1 requesting reversal of sterilization. Fertility outcome was analyzed in 76 @entity1 for a minimum of 6 months. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic tubal @entity254 in 37 @entity1 and @entity1661 in 44. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In both groups @entity254 was performed in two layers with four stitches using microsurgical technique. Overall pregnancy rates were 80.5% in the laparoscopy and 80.0% in the laparotomy group. The mean interval from operation to pregnancy was similar in the two groups (p = 0.9). Mean operating time was significantly longer for laparoscopy (201.9 +/- 33.8 min) than for laparotomy (148.7 +/- 32.5 min), including diagnostic laparoscopy. However, mean hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopy than for laparotomy (3.3 +/- 2.0 vs 6.1 +/- 0.6 days, p <0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic tubal @entity254 is less invasive and could be an alternative to laparotomy for reversal of tubal sterilization. Advanced laparoscopic equipment and much experience could enhance the pregnancy rate and reduce operating time.

Fertility outcome after tubal XXXX by laparoscopy and laparotomy.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['women', 'patients', 'PATIENTS'] @entity254 :: ('MESH:C563598', 'Disease') :: ['anastomosis'] @entity1661 :: ('MESH:D000008', 'Disease') :: ['abdominal tubal anastomosis']
@entity254 :: (MESH:C563598,Disease) :: ['anastomosis']
