Imaging Department, Reproductive & Genetic Hospital of CITIC-Xiangya, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410078, China.
Clinical Research Center for Reproduction and Genetics in Hunan Province, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410078, China.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Nov 18;24(1):762. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06943-9.
Due to the specific nature of interstitial pregnancy (IP), there are significant risks to both the mother and the foetus in women with a heterotopic interstitial pregnancy (HIP). IP alone has been analysed as a site-specific ectopic pregnancy (EP) in previous studies; however, according to the latest European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology criteria, IP is classified as a tubal pregnancy. If IP can be classified as a tubal pregnancy, then there is no difference in the effects of these two methods on intrauterine pregnancies (IUPs). Under the premise of timely surgery, disposing of IPs and tubal pregnancy (excluding IPs) should also have no differential effect on IUPs.
Patients with heterotopic fallopian tubal pregnancy (HP-tube) and HIP seen at our hospital from January 2005 to December 2020 were included. All included patients were diagnosed by transvaginal sonography (TVS), and EPs were confirmed by surgery and pathological analysis. The IUP outcomes after surgical treatment of the EPs were compared between the HP-tube group (n = 464) and the HIP group (n = 206). The outcomes of IUPs were evaluated in patients with HIP who underwent either laparoscopy (169 cases) or laparotomy (36 cases).
There was no significant difference in postoperative miscarriage (6.90% vs. 6.80%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.859, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.807-4.279), p = 0.145); early spontaneous miscarriage (19.61% vs. 18.93%, OR = 0.788, 95% CI (0.495-1.255), p = 0.316); or late miscarriage (0.43% vs. 0.49%, OR = 0.823, 95% CI (0.070-9.661), p = 0.877) between the HP-tube group and the HIP group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of preterm birth (7.33% vs. 6.80%, OR = 1.044, 95% CI (0.509-2.139), p = 0.907), live birth rate (71.60% vs. 73.30%, OR = 1.010, 95% CI (0.670-1.530), p = 0.980), or perinatal mortality rate (2.00% vs. 0.65%, OR = 0.580, 95% CI (0.030-3.590), p = 0.620). Compared to laparotomy for HIPs, laparoscopic treatment was associated with similar rates of postoperative miscarriage (5.33% vs. 13.90%, p = 0.076), live birth rate (72.80% vs. 75.00%, p = 0.948), caesarean Sect. (83.90% vs. 77.80%, p = 0.414).
After early diagnosis and treatment of EPs, patients in the HP-tube and HIP groups achieved comparable outcomes. Laparotomy and laparoscopy for treating HIPs yielded similar pregnancy outcomes.
由于间质妊娠(IP)的特殊性质,对于患有异位间质妊娠(HIP)的女性,无论是母亲还是胎儿都存在显著风险。在之前的研究中,IP 曾被单独分析为特定部位的异位妊娠(EP);然而,根据最新的欧洲人类生殖与胚胎学会标准,IP 被归类为输卵管妊娠。如果 IP 可以归类为输卵管妊娠,那么这两种方法对宫内妊娠(IUP)的影响没有区别。在及时手术的前提下,处理 IP 和输卵管妊娠(不包括 IP)对 IUP 也应该没有差异。
纳入 2005 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月在我院就诊的异位输卵管妊娠(HP-tube)和 HIP 患者。所有纳入患者均经经阴道超声(TVS)诊断,通过手术和病理分析确诊 EP。比较 HP-tube 组(n=464)和 HIP 组(n=206)接受 EP 手术治疗后的 IUP 结局。比较接受腹腔镜(169 例)或剖腹手术(36 例)的 HIP 患者的 IUP 结局。
两组患者术后流产率(6.90% vs. 6.80%,比值比(OR)=1.859,95%置信区间(CI)(0.807-4.279),p=0.145)、早期自然流产率(19.61% vs. 18.93%,OR=0.788,95%CI(0.495-1.255),p=0.316)和晚期流产率(0.43% vs. 0.49%,OR=0.823,95%CI(0.070-9.661),p=0.877)差异均无统计学意义。两组早产率(7.33% vs. 6.80%,OR=1.044,95%CI(0.509-2.139),p=0.907)、活产率(71.60% vs. 73.30%,OR=1.010,95%CI(0.670-1.530),p=0.980)和围产儿死亡率(2.00% vs. 0.65%,OR=0.580,95%CI(0.030-3.590),p=0.620)差异均无统计学意义。与 HIP 剖腹手术相比,腹腔镜治疗术后流产率(5.33% vs. 13.90%,p=0.076)、活产率(72.80% vs. 75.00%,p=0.948)和剖宫产率(83.90% vs. 77.80%,p=0.414)差异均无统计学意义。
EP 早期诊断和治疗后,HP-tube 和 HIP 组患者的结局相当。腹腔镜和剖腹手术治疗 HIP 的妊娠结局相似。