Management of unusual not scar ectopic pregnancy: a multicentre retrospective case series

Author:

Ferrari Federico1ORCID,Ficarelli Silvia1,Cornelli Benedetta2,Ferrari Filippo Alberto3,Farulla Antonino4,Alboni Carlo5,Fontana Enrico4,Roccio Marianna6,Boschi Anna Chiara6,Buca Danilo7,Leombroni Martina7,Peterlunger Isabel8,Moruzzi Maria Cristina9,Beneduce Giuliana9,Bolomini Giulia9,Laganà Antonio Simone10,Malorgio Piero3,Ricci Giuseppe11,Franchi Massimo3,Scambia Giovanni12,Sartori Enrico2,Odicino Franco2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy

2. Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy

3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, AOUI Verona, Italy

4. Policlinico di Modena, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy

5. Policlinico Sant’Orsola-Malpighi, University of Bologna, Italy

6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IRCCS Fondazione Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy

7. Centre for High Risk Pregnancy and Fetal Care, University of Chieti, Italy

8. Department of Medicine, Surgery and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Italy

9. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Roma, Italy

10. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Filippo Del Ponte" Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy

11. Institute for Maternal and Child Health, IRCCS Burlo Garofalo, Trieste, Italy

12. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Roma, Italy 11 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Filippo Del Ponte" Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy

Abstract

Background: Management of unusual not scar ectopic pregnancies (UNSEPs) is an unexplored clinical field because of their low incidence and lack of guidelines. Objective: To report the clinical presentation, the first- and second-line treatment and outcomes of UNSEPs. Methods: We retrospectively collected patients treated for UNSEP (namely cervical, interstitial, ovarian, angular, abdominal, cornual and intramural), their baseline characteristics, risk factors, symptoms, diagnostic pathway and the type of first-line treatment (medical, surgical or combined). We further collected treatment failures and the type of second-line treatment. We assessed treatment outcomes, time to serum beta human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) level negativity, length of recovery, follow up and return to a normal menstrual cycle. Results: From 2009 to 2019, we collected 79 cases. Of them, 27 (34%), 23 (29%), 12 (15%), 8 (10%), 6 (8%) and 3 (4%) were respectively cervical, interstitial, ovarian, angular, abdominal and cornual. Forty women (50.6%) were submitted to medical treatment, mostly methotrexate based; conversely, 36 patients (45.6%) underwent surgery and only 3 women (3.8%) received a combined treatment. Successful of first-line treatment rate, regardless of UNSEP location, was respectively 53% and 89% for medical and surgical treatment. Treatment failures (21 patients) were submitted to second-line treatment, respectively 47.6% and 52.4% to medical and surgical approach. Of interest, cervical pregnancies achieved the lowest rate of first-line medical treatment success (22%) and received more frequently (69%) a subsequent surgical approach with no hysterectomy. Interstitial pregnancies were submitted to surgery mostly for a matter of urgency (71%), otherwise they were treated with medical approach both at first- and second-line treatment. Ovarian pregnancies were treated with ovariectomy in 44% of the cases submitted to surgery. Angular pregnancies underwent surgery more often, while all the abdominal pregnancies underwent endoscopic or open surgery. Cornual pregnancies received cornuostomy in 75% of the cases. Overall, need for blood transfusion was 23.1% among the patients submitted to surgery. The median length of hospitalisation was shorter for women submitted to surgical first-line treatment (5 vs 10 days; p = 0.002). In case of first-line medical treatment and in case of failure, we found respectively an increase of 3 days (CI95% 0.6-5.5; p = 0.01) and of 3.6 days (CI95% 0.89-6.30; p = 0.01) in the length of hospitalisation. Negative β-HCG levels were obtained earlier in the surgical group (median 25 vs 51 days; p = 0.001), as well as the return to normal menstrual cycle (median 31 vs 67 days; p = 0.000). Post-treatment follow-up, regardless of the failure of first-line treatment, was shorter in the surgical group (median 32 versus 68 days; p= 0.003). Conclusion: Cervical pregnancies were successfully managed with surgical approach without hysterectomy, and hence we suggest avoiding medical treatment. No consensus emerged for other UNSEPs. Ovarian, angular and interstitial pregnancies are burdened by a non-conservative approach on the utero-ovarian structures. Surgical approach led to shorter recovery, earlier β-hCG negativity and shorter follow-up, even though there is an increased risk for blood transfusion.

Publisher

Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3