You are in:Home/Publications/Effects of cornual catheterization on uterotubal histology and function

Prof. dia almowafy :: Publications:

Title:
Effects of cornual catheterization on uterotubal histology and function
Authors: Michael P. Diamond, M.D.,a Richard E. Leach, M.D.,a Kenneth A. Ginsburg, M.D.,a Diaa M. El-Mowafi, M.D.,a Elizabeth Dawe, D.V.M.,b and Richard M. Scanlan, M.D.c
Year: 2016
Keywords: Not Available
Journal: Not Available
Volume: Not Available
Issue: Not Available
Pages: Not Available
Publisher: Not Available
Local/International: International
Paper Link: Not Available
Full paper dia almowafy_Diaa Infert Steril 2005 (1).pdf
Supplementary materials Not Available
Abstract:

Objective: To assess histologic damage and functional impairment following coaxial tubal catheterization. Design: Prospective randomized controlled study. Setting: Research laboratory. Patient(s): Ninety-two female New Zealand rabbits. Intervention(s): Tubal cannulation and mating. Main Outcome Measure(s): Rabbits randomized for placement of unilateral catheter and guide wire (group 1), unilateral catheter and guide wire plus falloposcope (group 2), and catheterization as in group 1 or 2 but using a cage catheter (groups 3 and 4, respectively). A fifth group consisted of rabbits with tubal perforations. Rabbits were killed at 2 or 4 weeks after catheterization or after mating. The sixth group consisted of only control rabbits. Result(s): Only one catheterized tube in groups 1 and 3 showed inflammation, fibrosis, or edema. None of the tubes manifested ciliary loss. Serosal tubal adhesions were identified in two tubes in group 1, in one in group 3, in three tubes in group 5, and one in the control group. The nidation index in control and nonperforated catheterized tubes ranged from 72%–95% (not significant). Nidation index in tubes unintentionally perforated was 81%. Conclusion(s): Catheterization of the uterotubal junction and fallopian tube in rabbits does not cause long-term tubal damage or impair tubal function. (Fertil Steril 2005;84:212–6. ©2005 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus