P. Capmas et al.
160
Fig. 21.1 Sonographic diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy on the left side and cor- pus luteum on the right side
Outcome
Eight months after the episode of ectopic pregnancy, the patient conceived again and an early ultrasound examination demonstrated an intrauterine pregnancy. Subsequently, she delivered a healthy male infant.
References
1. Fernandez H, Gervaise A. Ectopic pregnancies after infertility treat- ment: modern diagnosis and therapeutic strategy. Hum Reprod Update.
2004;10(6):503–13.
2. Bixby S, Tello R, Kuligowska E. Presence of a yolk sac on transvaginal so- nography is the most reliable predictor of single-dose methotrexate treat- ment failure in ectopic pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24(5):591–8.
3. da Costa Soares R, Elito J Jr., Camano L. Increment in beta-hCG in the 48-h period prior to treatment: a new variable predictive of therapeutic success in the treatment of ectopic pregnancy with methotrexate. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008;278(4):319–24.
4. Dilbaz S, Caliskan E, Dilbaz B, Degirmenci O, Haberal A. Predictors of methotrexate treatment failure in ectopic pregnancy. J Reprod Med.
2006;51(2):87–93.
5. Menon S, Colins J, Barnhart KT. Establishing a human chorionic gonado- tropin cutoff to guide methotrexate treatment of ectopic pregnancy: a sys- tematic review. Fertil Steril. 2007;87(3):481–4.
6. Moon MH, Lee YH, Lim KT, Yang JH, Park SH. Outcome prediction for treatment of tubal pregnancy using an intramuscular methotrexate proto- col. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27(10):1461–7.
7. Nazac A, Gervaise A, Bouyer J, de Tayrac R, Capella-Allouc S, Fernandez H. Predictors of success in methotrexate treatment of women with unrup- tured tubal pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21(2):181–5.
8. Nowak-Markwitz E, Michalak M, Olejnik M, Spaczynski M. Cutoff value of human chorionic gonadotropin in relation to the number of methotrex- ate cycles in the successful treatment of ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril.
2009;92(4):1203–7.
9. Elito J Jr., Reichmann AP, Uchiyama MN, Camano L. Predictive score for the systemic treatment of unruptured ectopic pregnancy with a single dose of methotrexate. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet. 1999;67(2):75–9.
10. Fernandez H, Lelaidier C, Thouvenez V, Frydman R. The use of a pre- therapeutic, predictive score to determine inclusion criteria for the non- surgical treatment of ectopic pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1991;6(7):995–8.
11. Lipscomb GH, McCord ML, Stovall TG, Huff G, Portera SG, Ling FW.
Predictors of success of methotrexate treatment in women with tubal ec- topic pregnancies. New Engl J Med. 1999;341(26):1974–8.
12. de Bennetot M, Rabischong B, Aublet-Cuvelier B, Belard F, Fernandez H, Bouyer J, et al. Fertility after tubal ectopic pregnancy: results of a population-based study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(5):1271–6; e1–3.
13. Allonier C, Ego A, Gerbaud L, Job-Spira N, Subtil D, Bouyer J. Com- parison of fertility rates after ectopic pregnancy in Auvergne and Lille regions. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2003;32(5):439–46.
P. Capmas et al.
162
14. Bouyer J, Job-Spira N, Pouly JL, Coste J, Germain E, Fernandez H. Fer- tility following radical, conservative-surgical or medical treatment for tubal pregnancy: a population-based study. BJOG. 2000;107(6):714–21.
15. Bouyer J, Fernandez H, Coste J, Pouly JL, Job-Spira N. Fertility after ectopic pregnancy: 10-year results in the Auvergne Registry. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2003;32(5):431–8.
16. Dias Pereira G, Hajenius PJ, Mol BW, Ankum WM, Hemrika DJ, Bossuyt PM, et al. Fertility outcome after systemic methotrexate and laparoscopic salpingostomy for tubal pregnancy. Lancet. 1999;353(9154):724–5.
17. Zilber U, Pansky M, Bukovsky I, Golan A. Laparoscopic salpingosto- my versus laparoscopic local methotrexate injection in the management of unruptured ectopic gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(3 Pt 1):600–2.
18. Fernandez H, Yves Vincent SC, Pauthier S, Audibert F, Frydman R. Ran- domized trial of conservative laparoscopic treatment and methotrexate administration in ectopic pregnancy and subsequent fertility. Hum Re- prod. 1998;13(11):3239–43.
19. Fernandez H, Capmas P, Lucot JP, Resch B, Panel P, Bouyer J. Fertility after ectopic pregnancy: the DEMETER randomized trial. Hum Reprod.
2013;28(5):1247–53.
20. Mol F, van Mello NM, Strandell A, Strandell K, Jurkovic D, Ross J, et al.
Salpingotomy versus salpingectomy in women with tubal pregnancy (ESEP study): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.
Lancet. 2014;383(9927):1483–9.
21. Boots CE, Gustofson RL, Feinberg EC. Does methotrexate administration for ectopic pregnancy after in vitro fertilization impact ovarian reserve or ovarian responsiveness? Fertil Steril. 2013;100(6):1590–3.
22. Xiao C, Dahan MH. The effect of methotrexate injection for treatment of an ectopic pregnancy on ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(4):e23.
23. Wiser A, Gilbert A, Nahum R, Orvieto R, Haas J, Hourvitz A, Weissman A, Younes G, Dirnfeld M, Hershko A, Shulman A, Tsafrir A, Holzer H, Shalom-Paz E, Tulandi T. Effects of treatment of ectopic pregnancy with methotrexate or salpingectomy on subsequent in vitro fertilization cycle.
Reprod BioMed 2013;26:449–53.
163
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 T. Tulandi (ed.), Ectopic Pregnancy,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-11140-7 AAbdominal ectopic pregnancy, 111,
117, 123 treatment of, 155 types of, 118
Abdominal pregnancy, 111, 112, 132, 149
Aminopterin syndrome, 71, 73 Assisted reproductive technology, 95 BBleeding, 35, 83, 85, 89, 93, 105,
due to cervical pregnancy, 88153 during pregnancy, 3, 34 ectopic pregnancy, 43, 47 internal, 96
intraabdominal, 126 severe, 89
tubal, 36 vaginal, 111 CCervical
ectopic pregnancy (CEP), 85, 86 pregnancy, 86, 87, 88, 103 Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP),
101–103, 106 diagnosis of, 103
Cesarean section scar pregnancy, 30 Compliance, 56–58
Congenital uterine malformations, Cornual pregnancy, 78, 81147
DDiagnostic criteria, 79
Discriminatory zone, 12, 13, 16, 17, 34
EEctopic pregnancy, 2 HhCG
discriminatory zone, 22, 34, 98, level, 3, 5, 11–14, 22, 23, 27, 34, 140
49, 55, 142
Hemorrhage, 5, 35, 43, 79, 111, 117, Hemorrhagic shock, 111, 125, 126, 133
149, 150 Hemostasis, 42–44, 83, 97 Heterotopic pregnancy, 6, 16, 29,
124–126
Hyperosmolar glucose injection, 126, 127
164 Index
IInterstitial pregnancy, 78, 81 diagnosis of, 80 outcomes of, 82
Intramural pregnancy, 116–119, 121 clinical course and management
of, 118 treatment of, 118
In vitro fertilization (IVF), 6, 29, 159 ectopic pregnancy in, 28 management of, 29 pregnancy, 87 treatment, 11, 27 treatment plans, 44 KKCl injection, 89
LLaparoscopy, 2, 14, 30, 42, 58, 62, 82, 97, 103, 133 diagnostic, 124 management of, 43 outcomes of, 47
MMedical treatment, 16, 50, 56, 89, 97, 126, 135, 154, 155 Methotrexate, 12–14, 16, 19, 22, 23,
30, 112, 116 case studies, 153 management of, 119
therapy, 36, 42, 50, 57, 71, 88, toxicity, 73159
Methotrexate embryopathy, 71 risks involved in, 71 Molar ectopic pregnancy, 140 Molar pregnancy, 140
risks factors involved in, 140 Müllerian ducts, 147
Multidose methotrexate, 50, 86, 89, 90
OOvarian pregnancy, 95
PPatient-compliance, 57 Persistent ectopic pregnancy, 56 Placenta accreta, 149
Pregnancy of unknown location (PUL), 12, 21 diagnosis of, 29 Primary ovarian ectopic, 95 RRecurrent ectopic pregnancy, 34,
36, 38 risks of, 53, 125 Renal anomalies, 147
Retroperitoneal ectopic pregnancy, diagnosis of, 133136
physiopathology of, 132 treatment of, 135 Retroperitoneal pregnancy
diagnosis of, 133 management of, 134 Risk factors, 2, 4, 125
for cervical pregnancy, 86 for ectopic pregnancy, 5, 6, 20, high, 834
Rudimentary uterine horn pregnancy, Ruptured 150
ectopic pregnancy, 35, 97, 124, ectopics, 96146
SSalpingectomy, 16, 30, 36, 41, 44, 57, 82, 126, 141, 150, 157 Shock, 96
Subsequent fertility, 154, 155, 159, Surgical treatment, 36, 43, 103, 116, 160
135, 157 TTeratogen, 70–73
Transvaginal ultrasound, 3, 21, 33, 34, 42, 61, 69, 85, 93, 98, 115, 133, 147