Liao Junwei, Lin Yong, Long Yan
Luzhou Maternal And Child Health Hospital (Luzhou Second People's Hospital), Gynecology, Luzhou City, Sichuan Province, China.
PLoS One. 2025 Sep 12;20(9):e0332169. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0332169. eCollection 2025.
Tubal pregnancy is one of the common emergencies in obstetrics and gynecology. There are various treatment options for tubal pregnancy. However, there is no consensus on how patients should choose among the treatment options that preserve the fallopian tube. This study aims to investigate the difference in prognosis between different treatment options when the tube is preserved in patients with tubal pregnancy.
We conducted a search for studies on tubal pregnancy in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Ultimately, we obtained 8 studies that met the screening criteria. The Jadad scale and NOS were used to evaluate the quality of the studies, and the evidence quality was evaluated and graded according to GRADE guidelines. Stata 17.0 software was used for data analysis.
A total of 8 studies involving 677 patients were included. Meta-analysis revealed a significant overall difference in the failure rate between methotrexate treatment and salpingostomy for tubal pregnancy(OR=1.582, 95%CI(1.062, 2.358), p = 0.024). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that a single dose of methotrexate was associated with a higher failure rate compared to salpingostomy(OR = 2.044,95%CI(1.20, 3.47), p = 0.008). In contrast, two or more doses of methotrexate did not show a significant difference in failure rate compared to salpingostomy(OR = 1.130, 95% CI(0.62, 2.07), p = 0.692). However, salpingostomy combined with methotrexate showed a lower failure rate compared to salpingostomy alone(OR = 0.11, 95% CI (0.03-0.48), p = 0.003). Network meta-analysis indicated that the salpingostomy combined with methotrexate had the lowest failure rate, while there was no significant difference in failure rates between salpingostomy and methotrexate alone.
For hemodynamically stable patients with a desire for future fertility, salpingostomy combined with methotrexate is an excellent option for treating tubal pregnancy. This approach has a lower failure rate compared to either methotrexate or salpingostomy alone and appears to have minimal impact on the patient's quality of life.
输卵管妊娠是妇产科常见的急症之一。输卵管妊娠有多种治疗选择。然而,对于患者应如何在保留输卵管的治疗方案中进行选择,目前尚无共识。本研究旨在探讨输卵管妊娠患者保留输卵管时不同治疗方案的预后差异。
我们在PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆数据库中检索关于输卵管妊娠的研究。最终,我们获得了8项符合筛选标准的研究。使用Jadad量表和NOS评估研究质量,并根据GRADE指南对证据质量进行评估和分级。使用Stata 17.0软件进行数据分析。
共纳入8项研究,涉及677例患者。荟萃分析显示,甲氨蝶呤治疗与输卵管造口术治疗输卵管妊娠的失败率总体存在显著差异(OR = 1.582,95%CI(1.062, 2.358),p = 0.024)。亚组分析表明,与输卵管造口术相比,单剂量甲氨蝶呤的失败率更高(OR = 2.044,95%CI(1.20, 3.47),p = 0.008)。相比之下,两剂或更多剂量的甲氨蝶呤与输卵管造口术相比,失败率无显著差异(OR = 1.130,95%CI(0.62, 2.07),p = 0.692)。然而,与单纯输卵管造口术相比,输卵管造口术联合甲氨蝶呤的失败率更低(OR = 0.11,95%CI(0.03 - 0.48),p = 0.003)。网状荟萃分析表明,输卵管造口术联合甲氨蝶呤的失败率最低,而单纯输卵管造口术和甲氨蝶呤之间的失败率无显著差异。
对于血流动力学稳定且有未来生育意愿的患者,输卵管造口术联合甲氨蝶呤是治疗输卵管妊娠的极佳选择。与单独使用甲氨蝶呤或输卵管造口术相比,这种方法的失败率更低,并且似乎对患者的生活质量影响最小。