Pomeroy tubal ligation by laparoscopy and minilaparotomy. Laparoscopy or minilaparotomy for sterilization of women. Comparison of three types of tubal sterilisation: the medan experience. Randomized comparative study of culdoscopy and minilaparotomy for surgical contraception in women.
Pomeroy tubal ligation is a widely-used method for surgical female sterilization. A laparoscopic technique of Pomeroy tubal ligation using endoloop sutures is compared with the conventional technique of Pomeroy tubal ligation by minilaparotomy. Forty-four women requiring sterilization were randomly selected for either laparoscopy (n = 24) or minilaparotomy (n = 20). Mean operative time in the laparoscopy group (18.90 +/- 5.56 with a range of 12-35 minutes) was not significantly different from that in the minilaparotomy (23.12 +/- 8.24 with a range of 15-45 minutes) group. In all women, tubal specimens confirmed tubal histology. Both laparoscopy and minilaparotomy procedures may be performed for Pomeroy tubal ligation with minor morbidity. In clinics with appropriate conditions, Pomeroy tubal ligation by laparoscopy may be preferable to minilaparotomy. A prospective randomly controlled study was conducted on 200 women undergoing sterilization by application of clips to the fallopian tubes. Laparotomy or laparoscopy was used, and the patients' response to the procedure was evaluated. There were few surgical complications. Postoperative pain and discomfort were experienced for a mean of 2.7 and 2.4 days in the those undergoing minilaparotomy and laparoscopy, respectively. The patients' response indicates a marginal benefit from the laparoscopic approach to application of clips to the fallopian tubes. Three methods of tubal sterilisation, viz. laparoscopy, culdoscopy and minilaparotomy, were evaluated in a trial involving 300 voluntary acceptors at the University Hospital in Medan, Indonesia. Equal numbers of women were randomly assigned to the three surgical groups. The results showed little differences among patients in the three groups for age, number of living children, contraceptive and abortion histories and pre-existing medical conditions. As expected, average surgical time for minilaparotomy was significantly higher than the times reported for the endoscopic techniques. Minilaparotomy also produced the highest incidence of operative complications while culdoscopy accounted for the highest rate of hospitalisation following operation. Four-year follow-up of the patients revealed only one case of pregnancy in the culdoscopy group, three years after tubectomy . Informed, healthy, volunteering women seeking interval sterilization were randomly allocated either to culdoscopy or to minilaparotomy. Data concerning the operation and follow-up to six weeks post-operation were analyzed for 199 women in the culdoscopy group and 196 in the minilaparotomy group. Major complications, both at operation and subsequently, occurred only in the vaginal procedure group (3%). Minor complications occurred in 3.6% of women in the minilaparotomy group, the majority of these involving the abdominal wound. In the women operated vaginally, minor complications occurred in 1.5%. Failure to perform the intended procedure on the fallopian tubes occurred in 10.6% of culdoscopy cases and 0.5% of minilaparotomy cases. It is concluded that the vaginal approach cannot be recommended except for surgeons experienced in vaginal surgery.
Major morbidity seems to be a rare outcome for both, laparoscopy and minilaparotomy. Personal preference of the woman and/or of the surgeon can guide the choice of technique. Practical aspects must be taken into account before implementing endoscopic techniques in settings with limited resources. Culdoscopy is not recommended as it carries a higher complication rate.