• A Fauconnier, A Mabrouk, D Heitz, and Y Ville.
• Service de Gynécologie et Obstétrique, CHI Poissy-Saint-Germain, 20, rue Armagis, 78105 Saint-Germain-en-Laye. afauconnier@chi-poissy-st-germain.fr
• J Gynecol Obst Bio R. 2003 Nov 1;32(7 Suppl):S18-27.

AbstractClinical examination (history and physical examination) is not considered to be a useful tool in the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy (EP). In this systematic review we aimed to evaluate its value when ancillary tests are not readily available or when they are equivocal. Suspicion of EP is based on the presence of one or more of the following signs: vaginal bleeding, acute pelvic pain, or any risk factors for EP occurring in a pregnant woman. Detection of early pregnancy by urinary or serum hCG testing must be systematic because neither medical history nor physical examination can rule out early pregnancy with a high level of confidence. No isolated sign has sufficient diagnostic accuracy to rule out EP. In presence of vaginal bleeding without pain and if abdominal and pelvic examination are normal the risk of EP is very low. The presence of spontaneous pain moderate to severe, peritoneal signs, or definite pain during digital cervical mobilization increase the probability of EP. Absence of these signs does not rule out EP but tend to eliminate tubal rupture. In the presence of these signs one may consider an emergency transfer in a specialized center. In their absence, suspicion of EP may have outpatient diagnosis procedures.

17 keywords...

hide…