Thirteen Years of Experience with Opportunistic Bilateral Salpingectomy During TLH in Low-Risk Premenopausal Women

  • P. G. Paul
  • Sumina Mannur
  • Hemant Shintre
  • George Paul
  • Gunjan Gulati
  • Santwan Mehta
Original Article



Opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS), also called as prophylactic salpingectomy or risk-reducing salpingectomy is the concurrent removal of the fallopian tubes in premenopausal women. Though there are some studies comparing the intraoperative complications and effect of salpingectomy on ovarian reserve, limited data are available on long-term follow-up after OBS.

Purpose of the Study

To evaluate the surgical outcome of routine bilateral salpingectomy during total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications. We also evaluated the incidence and reoperation rate for adnexal pathology after TLH.


A retrospective study of 1470 patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) with opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) over 13 years was carried out at Paul’s Hospital.


The mean age of the subjects was 43.6 ± 4.2 years, mean body mass index was 27 ± 5.4 kg/m2, and median parity was 2 (range 0–7). 43% of women had at least one previous surgery. The most common indication for surgery was fibroid uterus (67%, n = 985). The total complication rate was 4.4% (n = 65). One specimen showed paratubal borderline serous malignancy. The follow-up period ranged from 6 months to 13 years during which 17 (1.1%) women had adnexal pathology, and eight women (1.1%) needed resurgery for it. No ovarian malignancies were reported on follow-up.


OBS is a simple and short surgical step during TLH without increasing morbidity. OBS eliminates the risk of future diseases of tubal origin, and there might be a possible reduction in incidence and reoperation rate for future ovarian pathologies.


Total laparoscopic hysterectomy Opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy Prophylactic salpingectomy Adnexal pathology Ovarian cancer 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics Committee Approval

Written informed consent was obtained from the patients for publication. The retrospective observational nature of the study did not necessitate the local institutional ethics committee approval.


  1. 1.
    Vorwergk J, Radosa MP, Nicolaus K, et al. Prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy (PBS) to reduce ovarian cancer risk incorporated in standard premenopausal hysterectomy: complications and re-operation rate. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014;140:859–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Siesto G, Bergamini V, Zefiro F, Bolis P. Infectious morbidity after total laparoscopic hysterectomy: does concomitant salpingectomy make a difference? BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;116:589–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gill SE, Mills BB. Physician opinions regarding elective bilateral salpingectomy with hysterectomy and for sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20:517–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yoon SH, Kim SN, Shim SH, Kang SB, Lee SJ. Bilateral salpingectomy can reduce the risk of ovarian cancer in the general population: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2016;55:38–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hanley GE, McAlpine JN, Kwon JS, Mitchell G. Opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention. Gynecol Oncol Res Pract. 2015;2:5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caprini JA, Arcelus JI, Reyna JJ. Effective risk stratification of surgical and nonsurgical patients for venous thromboembolic disease. Semin Hematol. 2001;38(2 Suppl 5):12–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2014;136(5):E359–86. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Erickson BK, Conner MG, Landen CN Jr. The role of the fallopian tube in the origin of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:409–14. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Minig L, Chuang L, Patrono MG, Cárdenas-Rebollo JM, García-Donas J. Surgical outcomes and complications of prophylactic salpingectomy at the time of benign hysterectomy in premenopausal women. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22:653–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Berlit S, Tuschy B, Kehl S, Brade J, Sutterlin M, Hornemann A. Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with concomitant bilateral salpingectomy–why not? Anticancer Res. 2013;33(6):2771–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Selcuk I, Boyraz G, Esinler I. Adnexal torsion in a perimenopausal woman after laparoscopic hysterectomy: case report. Turkiye Klinikleri Jinekoloji Obstetrik. 2013;23:127–30.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kotlyar A, Gingold J, Shue S, Falcone T. The effect of salpingectomy on ovarian function. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(4):563–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guldberg R, Wehberg S, Skovlund CW, Mogensen O, Lidegaard O. Salpingectomy as standard at hysterectomy? A Danish cohort study, 1977–2010. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002845.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Advanced Endoscopy and Infertility TreatmentPaul’s HospitalKochiIndia

Personalised recommendations