• Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2007

    Review Meta Analysis

    Interventions for tubal ectopic pregnancy.

    • P J Hajenius, F Mol, B W J Mol, P M M Bossuyt, W M Ankum, and F van der Veen.
    • Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Obstetrics and Gynecology (H4-205), Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1105 AZ. p.hajenius@amc.nl
    • Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2007 Jan 24; 2007 (1): CD000324CD000324.

    BackgroundTreatment options for tubal ectopic pregnancy are; (1) surgery, e.g. salpingectomy or salpingo(s)tomy, either performed laparoscopically or by open surgery; (2) medical treatment, with a variety of drugs, that can be administered systemically and/or locally by various routes and (3) expectant management.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgery, medical treatment and expectant management of tubal ectopic pregnancy in view of primary treatment success, tubal preservation and future fertility.Search StrategyThe Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (up to February 2006), Current Controlled Trials Register (up to October 2006), and MEDLINE (up to October 2006) were searched.Selection CriteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatments in women with tubal ectopic pregnancy.Data Collection And AnalysisData extraction and quality assessment was done independently by two reviewers. Differences were resolved by discussion with all reviewers.Main ResultsThirty five studies have been analysed on the treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy, describing 25 different comparisons.SurgeryLaparoscopic salpingostomy is significantly less successful than the open surgical approach in the elimination of tubal ectopic pregnancy (2 RCTs, n=165, OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09, 0.86) due to a significant higher persistent trophoblast rate in laparoscopic surgery (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.1, 11). However, the laparoscopic approach is significantly less costly than open surgery (p=0.03). Long term follow-up (n=127) shows no evidence of a difference in intra uterine pregnancy rate (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.59, 2.5) but there is a non significant tendency to a lower repeat ectopic pregnancy rate (OR 0.47, 95% 0.15, 1.5). Salpingostomy alone is significantly less successful than when combined with a prophylactic single shot methotrexate (2 RCTs, n=163, OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.76) to prevent persistent trophoblast.Medical TreatmentSystemic methotrexate in a fixed multiple dose intramuscular regimen has a non significant tendency to a higher treatment success than laparoscopic salpingostomy (1 RCT, n=100, OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.73, 4.6). No significant differences are found in long term follow-up (n=74): intra uterine pregnancy (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.32, 2.1) and repeat ectopic pregnancy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.19, 4.1). One single dose intramuscular methotrexate is significantly less successful than laparoscopic salpingostomy (4 RCTs, n=265, OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20, 0.71). With a variable dose regimen treatment success rises, but shows no evidence of a difference compared to laparoscopic salpingostomy (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.52, 2.3). Long term follow-up (n=98) do not differ significantly (intra uterine pregnancy OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.43, 2.4, ectopic pregnancy OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.12, 2.4). The efficacy of systemic single dose methotrexate alone is significantly less successful than when combined with mifepristone (2 RCTs, n=262, OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35, 1.0). The same goes for the addition of traditional Chinese medicine (1 RCT, n=78, OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02, 0.39). Local medical treatment administered transvaginally under ultrasound guidance is significantly better than a 'blind' intra-tubal injection under laparoscopic guidance in the elimination of tubal ectopic pregnancy (1 RCT, n=36, methotrexate OR 5.8, 95% CI 1.3, 26; 1 RCT, n=80, hyperosmolar glucose OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15, 0.93). However, compared to laparoscopic salpingostomy, local injection of methotrexate administered transvaginally under ultrasound guidance is significantly less successful (1 RCT, n=78, OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04, 0.76) but with positive long term follow up (n=51): a significantly higher intra uterine pregnancy rate (OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.3, 14) and a non significant tendency to a lower repeat ectopic pregnancy rate (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.05, 1.7). EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT: Expectant management is significantly less successful than prostaglandin therapy (1 RCT, n=23, OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02-0.39).Authors' ConclusionsIn the surgical treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy laparoscopic surgery is a cost effective treatment. An alternative nonsurgical treatment option in selected patients is medical treatment with systemic methotrexate. Expectant management can not be adequately evaluated yet.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,704,841 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.