Suppr超能文献

经腹与经阴道超声引导下卵泡抽吸术的比较:一种风险评估公式。

Comparing transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound-guided follicular aspiration: A risk assessment formula.

作者信息

Roman-Rodriguez Christian F, Weissbrot Ellerie, Hsu Chaur-Dong, Wong Ashley, Siefert Caleb, Sung Linda

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nassau University Medical Center, East Meadow, NY, USA.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Winthrop University, Mineola, NY, USA.

出版信息

Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Dec;54(6):693-9. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2015.02.004.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify patients at risk of incomplete transvaginal oocyte retrieval, develop a risk assessment formula to identify patients who would benefit from a transabdominal approach, and compare complication and pregnancy rates between these two approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective case control study in a private in vitro fertilization center, 95 cases of women undergoing transabdominal follicular aspiration for oocyte retrieval (15 transabdominal only and 80 transabdominal and vaginal combined) were compared with 278 controls of women undergoing the transvaginal aspiration only. Transabdominal oocyte retrieval was performed when one or more ovaries could not be retrieved via the transvaginal approach. Main study outcomes included need for transabdominal retrieval, pregnancy rates, and complications.

RESULTS

A risk assessment scoring system was developed as follows: difficulty seeing ovaries on ultrasound (+4), history of pelvic surgery (+3), and body mass index of 30 kg/m(2) or greater (+2). With a cutoff score of 4 or greater, the overall sensitivity is 75%, specificity is 80%, positive predictive value is 57%, and negative predictive value is 90%. No statistically significant differences were found for pregnancy rates or complications.

CONCLUSION

The transabdominal approach is an alternative option that would increase the total number of oocytes retrieved with no statistical difference in complication or pregnancy rates. We also developed a scoring system that can serve as a useful screening tool for identifying women at increased risk of transabdominal oocyte retrieval.

摘要

目的

我们试图识别经阴道取卵不完全的风险患者,制定一个风险评估公式以识别能从经腹取卵方法中获益的患者,并比较这两种方法的并发症和妊娠率。

材料与方法

在一家私立体外受精中心进行的这项回顾性病例对照研究中,将95例行经腹卵泡抽吸取卵的女性病例(15例仅行经腹取卵,80例经腹和经阴道联合取卵)与278例仅行经阴道抽吸的对照女性进行比较。当一个或多个卵巢无法经阴道途径取出时,则行经腹取卵。主要研究结果包括行经腹取卵的必要性、妊娠率和并发症。

结果

制定了如下风险评估评分系统:超声检查时卵巢显示困难(+4分)、盆腔手术史(+3分)、体重指数为30kg/m²或更高(+2分)。截断分数为4分或更高时,总体敏感性为75%,特异性为80%,阳性预测值为57%,阴性预测值为90%。妊娠率或并发症方面未发现统计学上的显著差异。

结论

经腹取卵方法是一种替代选择,可增加取出的卵母细胞总数,且在并发症或妊娠率方面无统计学差异。我们还开发了一种评分系统,可作为识别行经腹取卵风险增加女性的有用筛查工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验