Is conservative surgery for tubal pregnancy preferable to salpingectomy? An economic analysis

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 104, Issue 7, 1997, Pages 834-839

  Mol, Ben W J ^a   Hajenius, Petra J ^a   Engelsbel, Simone ^b   Ankum, Willem M ^a   Hemrika, Douwe J ^b   van der Veen, Fulco ^a   Bossuyt, Patrick M M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b ONZE LIEVE VROUWE GASTHUIS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECTOPIC PREGNANCY; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SALPINGECTOMY; UTERINE TUBE PREGNANCY;

COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FALLOPIAN TUBES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, TUBAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RECURRENCE; REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TROPHOBLASTS;

EID: 0030797293     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb12029.x     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Rulin MC. Is salpingostomy the surgical treatment of choice for unruptured tubal pregnancy Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 1010-1013.
2. Hajenius PJ, Mol BWJ, Ankum WM, Van der Veen F, Bossuyt PMM, Lammes FB. Clearance curves of serum human chorionic gonadotrophin for the diagnosis of persistent trophoblast. Hum Reprod 1995; 10: 683-687.
3. Clausen I. Conservative versus radical surgery for tubal pregnancy; a review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996; 75: 8-12.
4. Mol BW, Hajenius PJ, Ankum WM, Van der Veen F, Bossuyt PMM. Conservative versus radical surgery for tubal pregnancy [letter]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996; 75: 866-867.
5. Job-Spira N, Bouyer J, Pouly JL et al. Fertility after ectopic pregnancy: first results of a population-based cohort study in France. Hum Reprod 1996; 11: 99-104.
6. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programs. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1986.
7. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 1977; 296: 716-721.
8. Ankum WM, Van der Veen F, Hamerlynck JV, Lammes FB. Laparoscopy: a dispensable tool in the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy Hum Reprod 1993; 8: 1301-1306.
9. Neumann PJ, Gharib SD, Weinstein MC. The cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilisation N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 239-242.
10. Brumsted J, Kessler C, Gibson C, Nakajima S, Riddick DH, Gibson M. A comparison of laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of ectopic pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1988; 71: 889-892.
11. Lundorff P, Thorburn J, Hahlin M, Kallfelt B, Lindblom B. Laparoscopic surgery in ectopic pregnancy: a randomised trial versus laparotomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1991; 70: 343-348.
12. Koopmanschap MA, Van Ineveld BM. Towards a new approach for estimating indirect costs of disease. Soc Sci Med 1992; 34: 1005-1010.
13. Bonsel GJ, Van der Maas PJ. Aan deWieg van de Toekomst. Scenario's voor de Zorg Rond de Menselijke Voortplanting. Houten : Bohn Stafleu van Loghum, 1994: 372-379.
14. Stromme WB, McKelvey JL, Adkins CD. Conservative surgery for ectopic pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1962; 19: 294-301.