Tubal Reversal Blog ‘uterotubal anastomosis’

Tubal Anastomosis at the Uterine Cornua

Tubouterine anastomosis is a tubal reversal procedure that is intermediate between tubotubal anastomosis and tubouterine implantation. It is also called cornual anastomosis because the tube is joined to the cornual area of the uterus with this operation. The cornu is the area where the fallopian tube normally emerges from the the uterus.

When Is Tubouterine Anastomosis Performed?

Tubouterine anastomosis is performed when there is a healthy tubal segment near the ovary, but no segment remains attached to the uterus, following a tubal ligation procedure. It is also performed when a tubal segment attached to the uterus is scarred and has no open lumen.

An incision is made into the uterus at the cornu to find the opening of the fallopian tube tube as it passes through the uterine muscle. If an opening is found, the tubal segment that remains is rejoined to the uterus at this site.

Case Histories

The topic of tubouterine anastomosis is a timely one. During the past week, 2 patients undergoing tubal reversal surgery at Chapel Hill Tubal Reversal Center required this operative procedure. In one case, each fallopian tube had been coagulated or burned next to the uterine cornu, leaving no segment attached to the uterus. The other patient had developed the condition known as salpingitis isthmica nodosa in the portion of the fallopian tube between the uterus and the a Falope ring. In both cases, tubal reversal was able to performed with the technique of tubouterine anastomosis.

Dr. Berger’s Comment

Frequently, patients have been informed by doctors who are not specialists in tubal ligation reversal that their fallopian tubes cannot be repaired after a tubal ligation. This is especially true when the proximal segments of the fallopian tubes are missing or diseased. But there are a variety of surgical techniques that can be used during tubal reversal surgery by a doctor who is an experienced tubal reversal surgeon. This is one of the advantages patients have when they come to Chapel Hill Tubal Reversal Center for their tubal reversal procedures.

Tubal Reversal Scholarly Publications

Early Experimental Studies in Animals

In 1969, David, Brackett and Garcia ⁽¹⁾ reported using microsurgical techniques for uterotubal anastomosis after removing the uterotubal junction from one side in 25 rabbits. Among 11 (44%) of the animals that became pregnant, fewer implantations occurred on the operated side than on the unoperated side. This showed that the uterotubal junction has a role, but is not absolutely required, in transferring embryos from the fallopian tube into the uterus for implantation.

In 1974, Paterson and Wood ⁽²⁾ divided the isthmic segment of one fallopian tube and then performed tubal anastomosis in 10 rabbits. They removed the fallopian tube and ovary on the other side so that any pregnancies that followed could be attributed to the repaired fallopian tube. The pregnancy rate was 60%. These investigators suggested that tubal anastomosis could be applied successfully to humans for reversal of tubal sterilization.

Hulka and Ulberg ⁽³⁾ in 1975 were the first to perform a successful reversal of tubal sterilization under experimental conditions. Six weeks after applying Hulka clips to the isthmic portion of fallopian tubes in 8 pigs, they removed the clipped portion of tubes and performed tubal anastomosis using an absorbable, multifilament suture (6-0 Dexon). Six (75%) of the animals subsequently became pregnant.

In 1975 Winston ⁽⁴⁾ reported an experiment in rabbits in which the experimental variables were different suture materials and duration of tubal splinting. In one group of 25 rabbits, he removed a portion of the tubal isthmus or ampulla and then performed tubotubal anastomosis with a nonabsorbable, nonreactive, monofilament suture (10-0 nylon). Using microsurgical technique, Winston took special care to include only the 2 outer layers (muscularis and serosa) of the fallopian tube in the suture line, avoiding the inner tubal layer (endothelium). He stabilized the anastomotic sites with polyethylene splints that were removed before closure of the abdominal cavity. Twenty-three (92%) of the animals became pregnant. This was the highest pregnancy rate reported so far after tubal anastomosis in animal studies. When either 8-0 catgut was used as the suture material or the tubal splint was left in place for 1 week after surgery, the pregnancy rate dropped in half.

Winston’s results were subsequently corroborated using microsurgical tubal anastomosis with 11-0 nylon, intraoperative splinting, and avoiding mucosal trauma from suture in the reconstruction of rabbit oviducts six weeks after application of Falope rings. Eighteen (82%) of 22 rabbits became pregnant after two matings.

Comment

Experimental studies in animals demonstrated excellent pregnancy rates following reconstruction of the fallopian tube by tubal anastomosis. They provided the basis for tubal reversal surgery as a clinical treatment. The best results came using microsurgical techniques with non-reactive, monofilament suture material, intraoperative tubal splints, and avoiding the introduction of suture in the inner layer of the tube.

Dr. Berger uses these surgical techniques in his tubal reversal procedures. For a more complete description of the early history of tubal reversal surgery, read Dr. Berger’s book chapter, Reversal of Female Sterilization: An Evaluation of Results ⁽⁵⁾.

References

1. David A, Brackett BG, Garcia CR: Effects of microsurgical removal of the rabbit uterotubal junction. Fertil Steril 20:250, 1969
2. Hulka JF, Ulberg LC: Reversibility of clip sterilization. Fertil Steril 26:1132, 1975
3. Paterson P, Wood C: The use of microsurgery in the reanastomosis of the rabbit fallopian tube. Fertil Steril 25:757, 1974
4. Winston RML: Microsurgical reanastomosis of the rabbit oviduct and its functional and pathological sequelae. Br I Obstet Gynaecol 82 :513, 1975
5. Berger GS: Reversal of female sterilization: An evaluation of results. In JM Phillips, editor, Microsurgery in Gynecology, Chapter 33. American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, Downey, California, 238-243, 1977.