• Bruno C Casanova, Mary D Sammel, Jesse Chittams, Kelly Timbers, Jennifer L Kulp, and Kurt T Barnhart.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
• J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2009 Feb 1;18(2):195-200.

ObjectiveSymptoms of vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain are common in cases of ectopic pregnancy (EP), spontaneous abortions (SAB), and complications of an intrauterine pregnancy (IUP). It is important to determine if efforts should focus on differentiating EP from an IUP (IUP + SAB) or a viable IUP from a nonviable gestation (EP + SAB) in women at risk for EP.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of women who presented with bleeding or pain or both during the first trimester of pregnancy. The cohort was divided into subjects diagnosed with IUP vs. (EP + SAB). The same cohort was then divided into subjects diagnosed with EP vs. (IUP + SAB). Logistic regression models based on risk factors for both outcomes (EP vs. [IUP + SAB] and IUP vs. [EP + SAB]) were obtained. ROC curves as well as Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit and Akaike's information criterion (AIC) were used.ResultsOverall, 18.1% (n = 367) of the women were diagnosed with EP, 58.8% (n = 1192) were diagnosed with an SAB, and 23.1% (n = 467) had an ongoing IUP. The area under the ROC curve for the model IUP vs. (EP + SAB) was statistically greater than the model EP vs. (IUP + SAB), p < 0.001. AIC and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit confirmed the better accuracy of the model comparing IUP vs. (EP + SAB).ConclusionsInformation collected at initial presentation from women at risk for EP to be used for building prediction rules should focus on differentiating a viable from a nonviable pregnancy rather than attempting to distinguish an extrauterine from an intrauterine pregnancy. However, this distinction should not affect current clinical care.

30 keywords...

hide…