Showing posts with label tubal reanastimosis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tubal reanastimosis. Show all posts

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Tubal Reversal Vs. IVF: Which Would Be Better? Asks 38 Yr. Old Mom Who Wants One More Child


Question:


Dear Doctor, I've just turned 38 and I have three children. Right after the birth of my third, I had my tubes tied. Somehow it made sense at the time but now I regret it. My kids are between the ages of 6 and 9 all delivered by c-section, and we would like one more. My ObGyn highly recommends IVF instead of a tubal reversal. I have a consultation with an infertility doctor in a few weeks and I am a little nervous. I would like some information or advice for a woman in my situation. I had no problems conceiving at all, have never missed a period, except during pregnancy, and I ovulate every month without fail.


My husband and I would consider adoption as well. Either way, IVF or adoption, they both are expensive and carry a risk of not working out, so we really want to make the best decision for our family. We just know that we want to expand our family. Thanks so much. K. from Maine


Answer:


Hello K. from Maine,


Your question is a common one and one that I have to discuss often. Hopefully I will be able to give you the facts so that you can make your decision. I have to commend your Gyn doctor for his recommendations, as I think he/she is correct, and I am sure that your infertility doctor will concur. Here is what I tell my patients to consider.


Let's look at the pros and cons of each option:


First let's consider tubal reversal. What tubal reversal (called a tubal reanastamosis) does is it brings the previously damaged or separated tubes back together so that they are open again. There are two initial considerations when considering this procedure. One is what type of tubal ligation was done. Some tubal ligations, and the doctors that do them, are more permanent. Most doctors doing tubal ligations realize and fear that if the tubal ligation (or "BTL" bilateral tubal ligation) fails, they are at risk for a malpractice suit. For that reason, they make doubly sure that it doesn't fail by doing as much damage to the tube as possible i.e. either remove/burn a large portion of the tube or remove the end of the tube "fimbria". This is especially true when the BTL is done immediately after a delivery or during a c-section, called a postpartum tubal ligation. Because the tube is readily accessible, the Physician will usually cut, tie and burn a large segment. The more damage a tube undergoes, the less chances that it can be repaired or that the repair will work.


The second consideration is how much tube is left to repair. The Fallopian tube needs a minimal amount of length and structure for it to be a functional tube. If the fimbriated end is removed or a large portion of the tube removed or burned, there will not be sufficient tube to repair for a tube to be functional. The tube is after all, a functioning structure with muscle and cilia within. If the proper segments are not available it doesn't work. The fallopian tube is not just a tube. So based on the fact that your tubal ligation was done at the time of a c-section, I would make the assumption that there is not sufficient tube to repair.


Another disadvantage to consider, of course, is what if the surgery is not successful. Not because there is not enough tubal length, but because it does not come together properly or heal properly. Because a surgery is being done, you cannot control how it heals or repairs itself. We can only bring the tube together and hope for the best. What I mean is that the tube can become misaligned so that it is not patent. Or, you can develop scar tissue at the site of repair which can block the tube completely or partially. So even if we assume that there is sufficient length of tube, it may not work due to factors that you cannot control. If the tube heals partially so that there it is only partially open or has scar tissue, you would then be at risk for a tubal pregnancy or "ectopic", which is a surgical emergency and carries the risk of death from rupture and hemorrhage.


Next you have to consider what are your chances of pregnancy if the reversal were successful. If the repair is successful, that is that all the previous criteria is met, then it will restore your natural chances of pregnancy. However, because you have aged since your last child and are now 39 years old, your natural chance of pregnancy has decreased significantly. Your last pregnancy was at the age of 32 years old when you conceived. At that time you had a 50-60% chance of pregnancy per year or 15% per month of trying. Now you are 39 years old. Your natural fertility rate has declined due to age and is now 12% per year or approximately 1-3% per month.You will also need to consider that this is a surgery, done either by a small incision "minilaparotomy", large incision like your c-section "laparotomy" or by laparoscopy. It carries all the risks of surgery and requires general anesthesia. There is also the risk that you may have scar tissue formation around the tubes due to the prior c-sections and tubal ligation that would make the surgery difficult or not possible. It is not a simple surgery like the tubal ligation. (As someone who has done hundreds of cases and come up against mega scar tissue, believe me it is not a walk in the park.) It is actually a very difficult microsurgery that requires a Physician with the proper skills to complete properly.


Finally, there is the issue of cost. In my surgery center, it will cost $10,000 for a tubal reversal (Physician fee and Surgery center fee). That will vary according to your area so you will need to check to see what the price will be for you. I did have a patient go to North Carolina for a tubal repair, at 38 years old and it cost her about $8000. She is still not successfully pregnant. She did get pregnant but had a miscarriage (partly because of the decreased fertility rate due to age). In any case, is $8000-10,000 worth a 1-3% chance of pregnancy per month?


In your case, you also have to consider that since you want only one more child, after all this expense and surgery, will you then have another tubal ligation? Also, having had 3 c-sections, you know that you will need to have another c-section. Finally, you also need to consider that you have a genetic risk of Down's syndrome that is 1/100 births due to your age i.e. it is significantly increased and your risk of miscarriages is increased.


Now let's examine the alternative, which is IVF. In this procedure, the eggs are taken directly from the ovaries so the tubes are bypassed and not required to be repaired. First, it is not a surgery but a procedure where a needle is introduced through the vagina to retrieve the eggs, under ultrasound guidance. Sedation is used but general anesthesia is not required. There is some risk but nothing like a surgery. So, the benefit is that as long as your ovaries are still working well, so that they stimulate well and produce an adequate number of follicles that have eggs in them, you can be sure that the procedure can be completed in it's entirety. There is no risk that the treatment cannot be completed. Now, there is the risk that a pregnancy will not result, different from reversal in that there is both the risk that the surgery will fail and that a pregnancy will not result, because the last two steps your body has to go through to achieve the pregnancy are still natural steps and we don't have the technology to make it happen. But because IVF accomplishes 7 of the 9 steps required for a pregnancy to naturally occur, the chances of success are higher. Also, despite this, at 39 years old pregnancy rates are 50-60% per treatment cycle (i.e. per month of trying). As you can see, this treatment also helps to overcome the age factor as well because more eggs can be retrieved and so there is a higher chance that we will get a good egg. There is still the genetic and miscarriage risks due to age, but I think those are reduced because IVF is less of a "natural" procedure and the weaker eggs/embryos do not survive the process. But, those risks are still there.


In the 17 years that I have been doing IVF, I have only had two cases of Down's syndrome in my patients, both in patients over 40 years old.


Well I think I have written one of my longer answers :)... so I think I should stop here. As you can see, IVF is better because it has a better chance of success in consideration of your age and type of tubal ligation, and it is less risky. The cost is higher, approximately $15,000 in all, but it has a better chance of working. You should consult my blog where I have written on this subject as well.

Good Luck,

Dr. Edward J. Ramirez, M.D., FACOG
Executive Medical Director
The Fertility and Gynecology Center
Monterey Bay IVF Program
www.montereybayivf.com

Monterey, California, U.S.A

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Tubal Reversal Vs. In Vitro Fertilization


Question:

I was diagnosed with PCOS 6 years ago. I had one treatment of Clomid and became pregnant soon after with healthy twin boys. At the time I had decided to get a tubal ligation soon after delivery but now I am regretting the decision I made. Now after so many years I am finally having a very regular menstrual cycle.

My question is, what would be the better option for me: IVF or a reversal of my tubal ligation?

Answer:

Hello, Here are the pros and cons for both options that I usually share with my patients:

*Tubal reversal or reanastamosis

It is a surgical procedure. Some surgeons do it as a large open incision and some as a small incision. Tubal reanastamosis is not covered by private insurance. The large incision will be very expensive ($20,000-$35,000) with a 6-8 week recovery. The small incision can be done as outpatient surgery but will cost $8 - $12,000. Recover will be 4 weeks. The latter surgery is skill-based and should be done by a physician comfortable with a mini-lap procedure to insure success.

The pros are that if the procedure works, you can get pregnant over and over by natural means.

The cons are that it is a surgery, and that success depends on the surgeon, the length of the tube after repair, and the type of tubal ligation that was done. There is an increased risk of a tubal pregnancy (surgical life threatening emergency). Pregnancy rate will vary by age and will be less than the equivalent rate in the normal population. You will need contraception again if you don't want more than one more child. You have to at least try for one year following surgery to get pregnant and determine if the reversal worked. If it hasn't, then the only option left is IVF for an additional cost.

*IVF or in vitro fertilization

IVF is a non-surgical procedure and will cost approximately $15,000 per attempt (which includes the IVF, medications and lab tests). It is sometimes covered by private insurance.

The pro is that it is not surgery, that you will get pregnant with minimal waiting, it is great for those who want one or two more children and that it has a much higher pregnancy rate than trying naturally, especially if you are older. Sometimes you will have enough eggs fertilize that some can be frozen and used for a later frozen embryo transfer, giving you the leisure of deciding to have another child when the time is right. It is not painful to have the eggs retrieved or transferred into the uterus and it is performed as an outpatient procedure.

The con is that it is expensive (as described above), that you have to take injections on a daily basis for a short period of time (although they are not too bad) and that you may have to do it again and again if you want to have more children. It is not a "natural" process since in vitro fertilization is done in an embryology lab.

In closing, nowadays, because IVF pregnancy rates are so much higher, we recommend IVF over tubal reanastamosis. However, the doctors that don't do IVF tend to recommend tubal reversal. The doctors that do both, as I do, tend to recommend IVF because it is better. It is more of a sure thing than the surgery. However, if you are still under the age of 35 and know that you will want to have more children, then the reanastamosis might be the best way to go, assuming that it works. The costs will be about the same, but if it doesn't work, then you have to do IVF. Most of my patients will choose IVF since it has a better chance of success for the money.

Good luck with your decision and whatever you do decide, I wish you success.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Ramirez, M.D.
Executive Medical Director
The Fertility and Gynecology Center
Monterey Bay IVF Program
http://www.montereybayivf.com/
Monterey, California, U.S.A.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Can Tubal Ligation Be Reversed?


Question:

If you have your tubes tied can you have them untied to get pregnant? How is the procedure done and how long does it take and what are the chances of getting pregnant?

Thank you!

Answer:

The term "tied" is actually a misnomer. Basically, all tubal ligation procedures damage a portion of the tube causing the canal to be blocked off. There are various methods and the ability to repair them varies depending on the method. The methods are:

Post-partum tubal ligation (tubes are tied in two places and the tube removed in between). The ends are then cauterized.

Laparoscopic tubal ligation done through a scope. The tubes can be burned, clipped or a ring placed. The clip method yields the best reversal and burning and cutting the least successful reversal.

In addition, there has to be sufficient normal tube present for the tube to function (4 cms). If the fimbria is damaged (fimbriectomy) then this is absolutely not reversable. Most physician do a laparoscopy first to evaluate whether or not the tubes can be reversed before doing the reversal procedure.

Because the tubes are damaged, the chances for pregnancy are reduced and the chances depend on your age. As an infertility specialist and gynecologic surgeon, I can perform microscopic tubal reconstruction. Regardless of age, a complete evaluation is done to eliminate the possibility of other infertility factors. Some of those factors may include: maternal age, surgical risk, and ectopic pregnancy risk. See my page on "Microscopic Tubal Reconstruction".


I do not recommend tubal reversal surgery in patients over the age of 35.

A viable alternative is In Vitro Fertilization, which has a much higher chance of pregnancy per month of trying. Most fertility specialists do not do reversal anymore for this reason. For the same cost, IVF is better and is not a surgery, which means less risk. Cost wise, both are approximately the same and range from $8000-15,000. I hope this answers your question.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Ramirez, M.D., FACOG
Executive Medical Director
The Fertility and Gynecology Center
Monterey Bay IVF Program
http://www.montereybayivf.com/
Monterey, California, U.S.A.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails