Researchers from the University of Illinois Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology recently published a cost analysis study in the AJOG (American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology). The cost analysis compared the cost of tubal reconstruction after tubal ligation and IVF treatments as means of conception and pregnancy. According to the analysis, tubal reconstruction is less costly than IVF treatment.

Study authors compared the average cost of tubal reconstruction and IVF for three age groups – younger than 35, 35 to 40 and older than 40. Tubal reconstruction was split into two possible categories – type A (long tube, good prognosis) and type B (short tube, less positive prognosis).

It is more cost effective to reconstruct the fallopian tubes in type A patients and type B patients, though type B patients may have a smaller chance of conception after reconstruction. Type B patients in excess of 40 years old may find IVF less costly if IVF treatments are at the lower end of normal.

Source: Hirshfeld-Cytron J, Winter J. Laparoscopic tubal re-anastomosis versus in vitro fertilization: cost- based decision analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Apr 10. pii: S0002-9378(13)00381-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.018.

• PubMed