1. Complications after opportunistic salpingectomy compared with tubal ligation at cesarean section: a retrospective cohort study.
- Author
-
Rufin KGA, do Valle HA, McAlpine JN, Elwood C, and Hanley GE
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Pregnancy, Retrospective Studies, Cesarean Section adverse effects, Cesarean Section methods, Salpingectomy adverse effects, Salpingectomy methods, Postoperative Complications epidemiology, Postoperative Complications etiology, Analgesics, Analgesics, Opioid, Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal, Sterilization, Tubal adverse effects, Sterilization, Tubal methods, Ovarian Neoplasms
- Abstract
Objective: To compare perioperative and postoperative complications in patients who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy (OS) (removal of the fallopian tubes for ovarian cancer risk reduction during another surgery) at the time of cesarean section (C-section) with those in patients who underwent tubal ligation., Design: A population-based, retrospective cohort study., Setting: British Columbia, Canada., Patient(s): A total of 18,184 patients were included in this study, of whom 8,440 and 9,744 underwent OS and tubal ligation, respectively., Intervention(s): Patients who underwent OS during a C-section were compared with those who underwent tubal ligation during a C-section., Main Outcome Measure(s): We examined the perioperative outcomes, including operating room time, length of hospital stay, surgical complications such as infections, anemia, incision complications, injury to a pelvic organ, or operating room return; postoperative complications, including physician visits for a postoperative infection or visits that resulted in ultrasound or laboratory examinations and hospital readmissions in the 6 weeks after discharge; and likelihood to fill a prescription for antibiotics or analgesics., Result(s): The OS group had decreased odds of perioperative complications compared with the tubal ligation group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.99). Patients who underwent OS did not have increased risks of physician visits for surgical complications, such as infection, or hospital readmissions in the 6 weeks after hospital discharge. In addition, these patients had 18% and 23% increased odds of filling prescriptions for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (aOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.28) and opioids (aOR, 1.23%; 95% CI, 1.12-1.35), respectively., Conclusion(s): In this population-based, real-world study of OS at C-section, we report decreased perioperative complications and no difference in postoperative complications between patients who underwent OS and those who underwent tubal ligation. Patients who underwent OS had an increased likelihood of filling a prescription for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the 6 weeks after hospital discharge. This result should be interpreted with caution because we did not have data on over-the-counter medication use and, thus, not all prescription analgesics were captured in our data. Our data suggest that OS after C-section is a safe way to provide effective contraception and ovarian cancer risk reduction., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests K.G.A.R. has nothing to disclose. H.A.d.V. has nothing to disclose. J.N.M. reports honoraria from Merck and GSK and the ANZGOG Data Safety Monitoring Board from 2022 to present, outside the submitted work. C.E. has nothing to disclose. G.E.H. reports funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, “The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Opportunistic Salpingectomy for Ovarian Cancer Prevention,” obtained through a peer-reviewed project grant, a grant received from the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, and VGH & UBC Hospital Foundation funding for data access and research support for the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF