Post-hysterectomy fallopian tube prolapse--a diagnostic pitfall

Prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy for the prevention of ovarian cancers: What is happening in Italy?

In 2011, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada encouraged physicians to discuss with their patients the risks and benefits of prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy (PBS) at the time of hysterectomy or tubal ligation for prevention of ovarian cancers (OCs). The aim of this study was to examine obstetrician-gynaecologists' knowledge, opinions and practice patterns relating to opportunistic salpingectomy in the general population. An anonymous electronic survey was sent to residents, academic and hospital staff in Italian OBGYN departments. The survey included questions on demographics, knowledge and attitudes in terms of the implementation of PBS in women at average population risk of OC. At least 80% of the 479 respondents reported performing PBS during hysterectomy for benign indications, chiefly with the intent of OC risk reduction but also to decrease the risk of reoperation and subsequent tubal pathologies. Among the 86 colleagues who do not routinely perform PBS, more than 50% stated that they have doubts regarding the benefits associated with the procedure. Most of the respondents declared that they were familiar with the literature on the topic and were aware of the data reporting the safety of the procedure, and only 21 (4.53%) had never heard of PBS. Over 40% of the respondents worked in hospitals in southern Italy. PBS as a prophylactic measure to reduce the incidence of OC is a well-known strategy among the Italian OBGYNs interviewed. Given the unequal distribution of respondents, however, wider educational initiatives should be undertaken, at least in Italy, to increase the implementation of salpingectomy among OBGYNs.

Opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention

Recently accumulated evidence has strongly indicated that the fallopian tube is the site of origin for the majority of high-grade serous ovarian or peritoneal carcinomas. As a result, recommendations have been made to change surgical practice in women at general population risk for ovarian cancer and perform bilateral salpingectomy at the time of hysterectomy without oophorectomy and in lieu of tubal ligation, a practice that has been termed opportunistic salpingectomy (OS). Despite suggestions that bilateral salpingectomy may be used as an interim procedure in women with BRCA1/2 mutations, enabling them to delay oophorectomy, there is insufficient evidence to support this practice as a safe alternative and risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy remains the recommended standard of care for high-risk women. While evidence on uptake of OS is sparse, it points toward increasing practice of OS during hysterectomy. The practice of OS for sterilization purposes, although expanding, appears to be less common. Operative and perioperative complications as measured by administered blood transfusions, hospital length of stay and readmissions were not increased with the addition of OS either at time of hysterectomy or for sterilization. Additional operating room time was 16 and 10 min for OS with hysterectomy and OS for sterilization, respectively. Short-term studies of the consequences of OS on ovarian function indicate no difference between women undergoing hysterectomy alone and hysterectomy with OS, but no long-term data exist. There is emerging evidence of effectiveness of excisional sterilization on reducing ovarian cancer rates from Rochester (OR = 0.36 95 % CI 0.13, 1.02), and bilateral salpingectomy from Denmark (OR = 0.58 95 % CI 0.36, 0.95) and Sweden (HR = 0.35, 95 % CI 0.17, 0.73), but these studies suffer from limitations, including that they were performed for pathological rather than prophylactic purposes. Initial cost-effectiveness modeling indicates that OS is cost-effective over a wide range of costs and risk estimates. While preliminary safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness data are promising, further research is needed (particularly long-term data on ovarian function) to firmly establish the safety of the procedure. The marginal benefit of OS compared with tubal ligation or hysterectomy alone needs to be established through large prospective studies of OS done for prophylaxis.

Physician opinions regarding elective bilateral salpingectomy with hysterectomy and for sterilization

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To gather opinions about the benefits and concerns of performing bilateral salpingectomy without oophorectomy during hysterectomy for benign indications and as a sterilization procedure.

DESIGN

Survey study (Canadian Task Force classification III).

SETTING

Practicing physicians in US institutions that have obstetrics and gynecology residency programs listed on the FREIDA website were surveyed electronically.

INTERVENTION

A validated, standardized questionnaire designed to gather opinions about bilateral salpingectomy performed during hysterectomy or for sterilization was administered via SurveyMonkey to practitioners of obstetrics and gynecology.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Results were compiled and presented as percentages of total responders. A total of 234 surveys were returned. Fifty-four percent of physicians perform bilateral salpingectomy during hysterectomy, most commonly to reduce the risks of cancer (75%) and repeat operation (49.1%). Of the 45.5% of physicians who do not perform bilateral salpingectomy during hysterectomy, most (69.4%) believe there is no benefit. Fifty-eight percent of practitioners believe that bilateral salpingectomy is the most effective method of sterilization after age 35 years but choose this method only in patients in whom one sterilization procedure has failed or because of tubal disease. Only 7.2% of surgeons prefer it as an interval sterilization procedure.

CONCLUSION

Most practitioners believe that bilateral salpingectomy is beneficial. Most also believe that bilateral salpingectomy is the most effective sterilization procedure; however, only 7.2% use this method as an interval procedure. More data are needed to evaluate the prophylactic effect of bilateral salpingectomy against postoperative sequelae.

Fallopian tube prolapse after hysterectomy: a systematic review

Background

Prolapse of the fallopian tube into the vaginal vault is a rarely reported complication that may occur after hysterectomy. Clinicians can miss the diagnosis of this disregarded complication when dealing with post-hysterectomy vaginal bleeding.

Objectives

We performed a systematic review in order to describe the clinical presentation, therapeutic management and outcome of fallopian tube prolapse occurring after hysterectomy.

Search Strategy

A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE references from January 1980 to December 2010 was performed. We included articles that reported cases of fallopian tube prolapse after hysterectomy. Data from eligible studies were independently extracted onto standardized forms by two reviewers.

Results

Twenty-eight articles including 51 cases of fallopian tube prolapse after hysterectomy were included in this systematic review. Clinical presentations included abdominal pain, dyspareunia, post- coital bleeding, and/or vaginal discharge. Two cases were asymptomatic and diagnosed at routine checkup. The surgical management reported comprised partial or total salpingectomy, with vaginal repair in some cases combined with oophorectomy using different approaches (vaginal approach, combined vaginal-laparoscopic approach, laparoscopic approach, or laparotomy). Six patients were initially treated by silver nitrate application without success.

Conclusions

This systematic review provided a precise summary of the clinical characteristics and treatment of patients presenting with fallopian tube prolapse following hysterectomy published in the past 30 years. We anticipate that these results will help inform current investigations and treatment.

Salpingectomy as standard at hysterectomy? A Danish cohort study, 1977-2010

OBJECTIVE

To assess if the risk of first-time salpingectomy was affected by prior hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes and by prior sterilisation.

DESIGN

A historical cohort study.

SETTING

Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

170 000 randomly selected women born 1947-1963 (10 000/year) were followed from 1977 until the end of 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effect of hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes or sterilisation on the risk of salpingectomy. Both were modelled in a Cox proportional hazards model as time-dependent covariates, analysing time to first salpingectomy. End of follow-up period was 31 December 2010.

RESULTS

Of 9591 hysterectomies, 6456 (67.3%) had both fallopian tubes retained. HRs for salpingectomy after hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes and sterilisation were 2.13 (95% 1.88 to 2.42) and 2.42 (2.21 to 2.64), as compared with those for non-hysterectomised and non-sterilised women.

CONCLUSIONS

Women undergoing hysterectomy with retained fallopian tubes or sterilisation have at least a doubled risk of subsequent salpingectomy. Removal of the fallopian tubes at hysterectomy should therefore be recommended.

Fallopian tube prolapse after total laparoscopic hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

Fallopian tube prolapse is an uncommon but reported complication after laparoscopic hysterectomy.

CASE

Fallopian tube prolapse was diagnosed in a patient 6 months after undergoing a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. The presenting symptoms were midline abdominal pain, abdominal distention, and dyspareunia. A laparoscopic approach showed a portion of fallopian tube prolapsed through the vaginal cuff.

CONCLUSION

This case suggests that fallopian tube prolapse can occur up to 6 months after a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Once detected, fallopian tube prolapse can be managed using a laparoscopic approach in select patients.