Odejinmi Funlayo, Oliver Reeba
Whipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
J Comp Eff Res. 2014 May;3(3):241-3. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.12.
Evaluation of: Mol F, van Mello NM, Strandell A et al. Salpingotomy versus salpingectomy in women with tubal pregnancy (ESEP study): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 383(9927), 1483-1439 (2014). Ectopic pregnancy can still manifest itself as a life-threatening condition and, hence, the establishment of accurate evidence-based treatment modalities remain paramount. Surgical treatment has long been a mainstay of ectopic pregnancy treatment. To date, there is a wealth of data establishing laparoscopic treatment as the 'gold standard'; however, paradoxically, the evidence behind choosing the two main treatment methods of salpingotomy and salpingectomy, especially with regards to future fertility potential, remain unclear. This article is a summary of a randomized controlled trial of salpingotomy versus salpingectomy in patients with an apparent contralateral healthy tube and the impact on future fertility. It attempts to answer the clinical question whether preservation of tube by salpingotomy increases the futures chances of natural conception as opposed to salpingectomy.
莫尔·F、范·梅洛·N·M、斯特兰德尔·A等。输卵管妊娠女性的输卵管切开术与输卵管切除术（ESEP研究）：一项开放标签、多中心、随机对照试验。《柳叶刀》383(9927)，1483 - 1439（2014年）。异位妊娠仍可能表现为危及生命的情况，因此，确立准确的循证治疗方式仍然至关重要。手术治疗长期以来一直是异位妊娠治疗的主要手段。迄今为止，有大量数据将腹腔镜治疗确立为“金标准”；然而，矛盾的是，选择输卵管切开术和输卵管切除术这两种主要治疗方法背后的证据，尤其是关于未来生育潜力的证据，仍不明确。本文是一项针对对侧输卵管明显健康的患者进行输卵管切开术与输卵管切除术的随机对照试验及其对未来生育影响的总结。它试图回答这样一个临床问题：与输卵管切除术相比，通过输卵管切开术保留输卵管是否会增加未来自然受孕的机会。
