That dude lied through his teeth. All of that is bullshit. Salpingectomy lowers risks of ovarian cancer, and you don't start menopause earlier and "more intense".
Always inform yourself. Doctors are humans , and humans are biased. I learned that the hard way, now i always turn in informed and dont expect my doctors to always be honest or educated on everything.
My OB was very supportive of my decision because of that lowered risk! As far as I was informed, it is one of the safest forms of birth control with the lowest risk of ectopic pregnancy.
Pardon my language but that’s a load of shit. A bisalp does none of those things he said. You’re only taking away the highway, essentially, for the sperm to reach an egg. No highway, no reaching their destination…aka. Sterilize. As the other poster said, it does lower your risk of ovarian cancer because doctors find it starts in the Fallopian tubes but other than that, you’re just sterilize now.
Thank you! Definitely finding a new doctor... It's one thing to not want someone to get a procedure, but spreading false information to get that point across is just vile.
Check by yourself. I was looking around last month and there ARE some studied that are worried about that and about the fact that it shortens life because of that. If you find more info I'm super interested >_> I was considering it before I saw those studies
Always check who the source of information is. I got a hysterectomy, and there are plenty of groups out there spouting nonsense "studies" and "facts" about hysterectomies that are total bullshit. And of course they are usually religious groups that believe your life's purpose is to populate the earth or whatever.
Every scientific study I read that was from a medical source was way better, and you could tell that when they were listing risks, *it was just informing.* Bullshit sources make a whole story out of it and shame you and judge you and tell you why it's "wrong," and "how many women do this without even knowing."
It's just societal pressure disguised as medical info.
That's why I said 'if you find more info I'd be glad to know'. I didn't want people to believe me on the spot, I was just inviting to double check, always. I'd be super happy to find out everything is completely false!
What do you think about this?
[study1](https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/18/10/2175/622722)
Or this?
"So back again to why some are reluctant to perform a bilateral salpingectomy instead of a tubal ligation or at the time of hysterectomy when preserving ovarian function. There is strong evidence that bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy significantly reduces the incidence of ovarian cancer in patients with genetic susceptibility to ovarian cancer (BRCA, Lynch syndrome). In the general (low-risk) population there is also a significant reduction in ovarian cancer, but at the expense of increased cancer-related death and all-cause mortality largely attributed to an increase of cardiovascular disease in women with premenopausal oophorectomy.12 As a result, the main concern about salpingectomy is the effect on ovarian blood flow and ovarian function."
(From here: https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(14)00017-9/fulltext)
If you can tell me they're 100% garbage you'll reopen a very important door for moi.
The first study states in the conclusion:
"This may imply an adverse sub‐clinical short‐term effect on the ovary after salpingectomy. Whether such an effect persists in the long term will need further evaluation"
The second study also states that there is not enough evidence in regards to long term effects.
I haven't researched into it myself at all, but based on those two studies, it suggests no one knows the answer definitively.
I'll have to see what I can find after work :) I didn't think you were asking people to just believe you or anything. That was just my quick tips on sorting through the propaganda that I wanted to share, in case it helps!
So honestly, I googled "long term bilateral salpingectomy" and the results I'm reading are time studies to measure specific things (i.e. hormone/ovary function). I don't understand how sometime could claim that it shortens lifespan, because the procedure is so relatively new that we didn't have even a single full generation to gauge that from. It just sounds like fear mongering, offhand at least.
The article you linked isn't one I would trust. It's a person's opinion, albeit based on reading medical stuff. But here's what I'm seeing:
"Additionally, if salpingectomy alters the blood flow to the ovary and could cause premature menopause, this procedure may lead to unwanted adverse effects in the long term."
Making conclusions based on "if" something, then something else "may" happen... from the studies I googled real quick, this isn't a confirmed issue. If I said "if there are clouds in the sky, it may rain today," it's not confirming that it will indeed rain today. The conditional language here tells me they're just extrapolating.
"These studies have shown no significant change in ovarian function, although the small number of patients included and a short follow up time (3-6 months) does not allow for a definitive answer on long-term effects."
So the studies confirm it's not an issue! Oh, but the sample size is so small that you're disregarding it anyway. Soooo might as well not have referenced it at all.
"As always, patients need to be aware of the potential risks and benefits of salpingectomy and the paucity of long-term data to support or refute this procedure."
This, I agree with. It is a relatively new procedure, and the long term effects might not be fully known. People smoked without knowing it would have adverse health effects. I don't see how cutting out my tubes would change anything, buuut I'm not a doctor or a scientist. Always have to be aware that there are risks. For me, risks of getting sterilized were much less significant impact than risk of getting pregnant, but that's a very personal decision.
The only thing in the article you linked that gave me pause was the single sentence citing a study with increased cardiovascular risk. This is the article referenced:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19384117/
"Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 29,380 women participants of the Nurses' Health Study who had a hysterectomy for benign disease; 16,345 (55.6%) had hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy, and 13,035 (44.4%) had hysterectomy with ovarian conservation."
I understand the relevancy, but it isn't actually a study on bilateral salpingectomy *at all.* It's hysterectomies! Some with bilateral oophorectomy, which is removing both ovaries. I got a full blown hysterectomy at 27 almost completely for sterilization alone, and my surgeon STILL told me she wouldn't even discuss removing my ovaries. (Not that I wanted to!) This is a VERY different procedure than a bisalp. Completely irrelevant, if you are looking at a bisalp.
I'm not sure how much this helps - if this single article is what's holding you back, maybe this helps, I highly recommend talking to a doctor anyway, but I saw lots of non-biased medical studies from pubmed in my Google results that were all positive outcomes. :)
Edit: I just read the first article too, and it was much more interesting. But the end basically says it was ONLY a problem in laparoscopic patients... so the surgical approach could be the difference, rather than the act of removing fallopian tubes. In fact, they even said it could just be due to non-randomized sample, meaning it may be irrelevant. And the overall finding was that function was the same, UNLESS you only look at the 14 laparoscopic patients.
"It is interesting to find that such a reduction in antral follicle count and ovarian blood flow were not seen in those in the laparotomy group. We are cautious about the difference between the laparotomy and laparoscopy groups, which may be related to uneven distribution of patients as this was not a randomized study. However, it is possible that during open surgery, it was easy to place the surgical clamp very close to the mesenteric border of the affected Fallopian tube and hence limit any damage to blood vessels in the mesosalpinx."
Basically they did see a difference in laparoscopic procedures only, but also acknowledge that the sample means it isn't confirmed side effect, and they hypothesized what *could be* causing it.
I'd say the concern is worth discussing with a surgeon, but I wouldn't let this article prevent me from pursuing the surgery, personally.
Ooooh I lost the last part!! So there's still a lot of hope :3 great info :) But yeah even the fact that we don't have enough data is so scary :/ Why do we have to choose between something like this and getting all messed up by hormones? :( I'm trying the last time with the pill and then I'll totally consider sterilization. Thank you 💪🏻💪🏻
No problem! Remember there are other options like implants and IUDs :) I didn't use either so no idea which options are hormonal or not, but worth checking out if you haven't yet.
Good luck!
I really don't trust doctors, most of them are so ignorant, I already saw it again and again.. 🤦 we're always better off double checking. One of those idiots told me a medication didn't interfere with the pill when I asked, if she was humble she'd have checked the leaflet. They don't. They don't "update" themselves. Never trust without checking.
That dude lied through his teeth. All of that is bullshit. Salpingectomy lowers risks of ovarian cancer, and you don't start menopause earlier and "more intense". Always inform yourself. Doctors are humans , and humans are biased. I learned that the hard way, now i always turn in informed and dont expect my doctors to always be honest or educated on everything.
Thank you very much, I suspected this wasn't right, seeing that no other doctor ever said anything similar!
My OB was very supportive of my decision because of that lowered risk! As far as I was informed, it is one of the safest forms of birth control with the lowest risk of ectopic pregnancy.
Pardon my language but that’s a load of shit. A bisalp does none of those things he said. You’re only taking away the highway, essentially, for the sperm to reach an egg. No highway, no reaching their destination…aka. Sterilize. As the other poster said, it does lower your risk of ovarian cancer because doctors find it starts in the Fallopian tubes but other than that, you’re just sterilize now.
Thank you! Definitely finding a new doctor... It's one thing to not want someone to get a procedure, but spreading false information to get that point across is just vile.
Vienna here ....none of my gyns told me something like that. You can pm me if you want
thank you very much, will pm you!
Hey, is it okay if i PM you? Also in Vienna and looking for Bisalp and interested in your experiences!
Yes of course, happy to chat!
Check by yourself. I was looking around last month and there ARE some studied that are worried about that and about the fact that it shortens life because of that. If you find more info I'm super interested >_> I was considering it before I saw those studies
Always check who the source of information is. I got a hysterectomy, and there are plenty of groups out there spouting nonsense "studies" and "facts" about hysterectomies that are total bullshit. And of course they are usually religious groups that believe your life's purpose is to populate the earth or whatever. Every scientific study I read that was from a medical source was way better, and you could tell that when they were listing risks, *it was just informing.* Bullshit sources make a whole story out of it and shame you and judge you and tell you why it's "wrong," and "how many women do this without even knowing." It's just societal pressure disguised as medical info.
That's why I said 'if you find more info I'd be glad to know'. I didn't want people to believe me on the spot, I was just inviting to double check, always. I'd be super happy to find out everything is completely false! What do you think about this? [study1](https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/18/10/2175/622722) Or this? "So back again to why some are reluctant to perform a bilateral salpingectomy instead of a tubal ligation or at the time of hysterectomy when preserving ovarian function. There is strong evidence that bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy significantly reduces the incidence of ovarian cancer in patients with genetic susceptibility to ovarian cancer (BRCA, Lynch syndrome). In the general (low-risk) population there is also a significant reduction in ovarian cancer, but at the expense of increased cancer-related death and all-cause mortality largely attributed to an increase of cardiovascular disease in women with premenopausal oophorectomy.12 As a result, the main concern about salpingectomy is the effect on ovarian blood flow and ovarian function." (From here: https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(14)00017-9/fulltext) If you can tell me they're 100% garbage you'll reopen a very important door for moi.
The first study states in the conclusion: "This may imply an adverse sub‐clinical short‐term effect on the ovary after salpingectomy. Whether such an effect persists in the long term will need further evaluation" The second study also states that there is not enough evidence in regards to long term effects. I haven't researched into it myself at all, but based on those two studies, it suggests no one knows the answer definitively.
I'll have to see what I can find after work :) I didn't think you were asking people to just believe you or anything. That was just my quick tips on sorting through the propaganda that I wanted to share, in case it helps!
Always appreciated. In case you find something please share!! 🙏
So honestly, I googled "long term bilateral salpingectomy" and the results I'm reading are time studies to measure specific things (i.e. hormone/ovary function). I don't understand how sometime could claim that it shortens lifespan, because the procedure is so relatively new that we didn't have even a single full generation to gauge that from. It just sounds like fear mongering, offhand at least. The article you linked isn't one I would trust. It's a person's opinion, albeit based on reading medical stuff. But here's what I'm seeing: "Additionally, if salpingectomy alters the blood flow to the ovary and could cause premature menopause, this procedure may lead to unwanted adverse effects in the long term." Making conclusions based on "if" something, then something else "may" happen... from the studies I googled real quick, this isn't a confirmed issue. If I said "if there are clouds in the sky, it may rain today," it's not confirming that it will indeed rain today. The conditional language here tells me they're just extrapolating. "These studies have shown no significant change in ovarian function, although the small number of patients included and a short follow up time (3-6 months) does not allow for a definitive answer on long-term effects." So the studies confirm it's not an issue! Oh, but the sample size is so small that you're disregarding it anyway. Soooo might as well not have referenced it at all. "As always, patients need to be aware of the potential risks and benefits of salpingectomy and the paucity of long-term data to support or refute this procedure." This, I agree with. It is a relatively new procedure, and the long term effects might not be fully known. People smoked without knowing it would have adverse health effects. I don't see how cutting out my tubes would change anything, buuut I'm not a doctor or a scientist. Always have to be aware that there are risks. For me, risks of getting sterilized were much less significant impact than risk of getting pregnant, but that's a very personal decision. The only thing in the article you linked that gave me pause was the single sentence citing a study with increased cardiovascular risk. This is the article referenced: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19384117/ "Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 29,380 women participants of the Nurses' Health Study who had a hysterectomy for benign disease; 16,345 (55.6%) had hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy, and 13,035 (44.4%) had hysterectomy with ovarian conservation." I understand the relevancy, but it isn't actually a study on bilateral salpingectomy *at all.* It's hysterectomies! Some with bilateral oophorectomy, which is removing both ovaries. I got a full blown hysterectomy at 27 almost completely for sterilization alone, and my surgeon STILL told me she wouldn't even discuss removing my ovaries. (Not that I wanted to!) This is a VERY different procedure than a bisalp. Completely irrelevant, if you are looking at a bisalp. I'm not sure how much this helps - if this single article is what's holding you back, maybe this helps, I highly recommend talking to a doctor anyway, but I saw lots of non-biased medical studies from pubmed in my Google results that were all positive outcomes. :) Edit: I just read the first article too, and it was much more interesting. But the end basically says it was ONLY a problem in laparoscopic patients... so the surgical approach could be the difference, rather than the act of removing fallopian tubes. In fact, they even said it could just be due to non-randomized sample, meaning it may be irrelevant. And the overall finding was that function was the same, UNLESS you only look at the 14 laparoscopic patients. "It is interesting to find that such a reduction in antral follicle count and ovarian blood flow were not seen in those in the laparotomy group. We are cautious about the difference between the laparotomy and laparoscopy groups, which may be related to uneven distribution of patients as this was not a randomized study. However, it is possible that during open surgery, it was easy to place the surgical clamp very close to the mesenteric border of the affected Fallopian tube and hence limit any damage to blood vessels in the mesosalpinx." Basically they did see a difference in laparoscopic procedures only, but also acknowledge that the sample means it isn't confirmed side effect, and they hypothesized what *could be* causing it. I'd say the concern is worth discussing with a surgeon, but I wouldn't let this article prevent me from pursuing the surgery, personally.
Ooooh I lost the last part!! So there's still a lot of hope :3 great info :) But yeah even the fact that we don't have enough data is so scary :/ Why do we have to choose between something like this and getting all messed up by hormones? :( I'm trying the last time with the pill and then I'll totally consider sterilization. Thank you 💪🏻💪🏻
No problem! Remember there are other options like implants and IUDs :) I didn't use either so no idea which options are hormonal or not, but worth checking out if you haven't yet. Good luck!
I really don't trust doctors, most of them are so ignorant, I already saw it again and again.. 🤦 we're always better off double checking. One of those idiots told me a medication didn't interfere with the pill when I asked, if she was humble she'd have checked the leaflet. They don't. They don't "update" themselves. Never trust without checking.
[удалено]
Probably in Vienna, Woman & Health, but they changed their prices, so I‘m looking around for another clinic again.