The ESEP study: Salpingostomy versus salpingectomy for tubal ectopic pregnancy; the impact on future fertility: A randomised controlled trial

BMC Women's Health

Volumn 8, Issue , 2008, Pages

  Mol, Femke ^a   Strandell, Annika ^b   Jurkovic, Davor ^c   Yalcinkaya, Tamer ^d   Verhoeve, Harold R ^e   Koks, Carolien A M ^f   van der Linden, Paul J Q ^g   Graziosi, Giuseppe C M ^h   Thurkow, Andreas L ^e   Hoek, Annemieke ⁱ   Hogström, Lars ^j   Klinte, Ingemar ^k   Nilsson, Kerstin ^l   van Mello, Norah M ^a   Ankum, Willem M ^a   van der Veen, Fulco ^a   Mol, Ben W M ^a,f   Hajenius, Petra J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c KING S COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d WAKE FOREST SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e ONZE LIEVE VROUWE GASTHUIS   (Netherlands)

^f MÁXIMA MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^g DEVENTER HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^h ST ANTONIUS HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^j University Medical Centre Groningen ^*  (Sweden)

^k Norra Älvsborgs Läns Sjukhus NÄL   (Sweden)

^l ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; FEMALE FERTILITY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH STATUS; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIVE BIRTH; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PARTHENOGENESIS; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PROGNOSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SALPINGECTOMY; SALPINGOSTOMY; TROPHOBLAST; UTERINE TUBE PREGNANCY; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FERTILITY; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; PREGNANCY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; FERTILITY; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GYNECOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, TUBAL; SALPINGOSTOMY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TROPHOBLASTS;

EID: 47949083456     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726874     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6874-8-11     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Hajenius PJ Mol F Mol BW Bossuyt PM Ankum WM Veen van der F Interventions for tubal ectopic pregnancy Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 1:CD000324. 17253448
2. Stromme WB McKelvey JL Adkins CD Conservative surgery for ectopic pregnancy Obstet Gynecol 1962, 19:294-301. 13917857
3. Clausen I Conservative versus radical surgery for tubal pregnancy Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996, 75:8-12. 10.3109/00016349609033276 8561006
4. Yao M Tulandi T Current status of surgical and nonsurgical management of ectopic pregnancy Fertil Steril 1997, 67:421-33. 10.1016/ S0015-0282(97)80064-7 9091325
5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists The management of ectopic pregnancy Guideline No 21 RCOG Press 2004.
6. Silva P Schaper A Rooney B Reproductive outcome after 143 laparoscopic procedures for ectopic pregnancy Fertil Steril 1993, 81:710-5.
7. Job-Spira N Bouyer J Pouly JL Germain E Coste J Aublet-Cuvelier B Fernandez H Fertility after ectopic pregnancy: First results of a population-based cohort study in France Hum Reprod 1996, 11:99-104. 8671168
8. Mol BWJ Matthijse HC Tinga DJ Huynh T Hajenius PJ Ankum WM Bossuyt PMM Veen van der F Fertility after conservative and radical surgery for tubal pregnancy Hum Reprod 1998, 13:1804-9. 10.1093/humrep/13.7.1804 9740428
9. Bouyer J Job-Spira N Pouly JL Coste J Germain E Fernandez H Fertility following radical, conservative-surgical or medical treatment for tubal pregnancy: A population-based study BJOG 2000, 107(6):714-21. 10.1111/ j.1471-0528.2000.tb13330.x 10847225
10. Bangsgaard N Lund CO Otessen B Nilas L Improved fertility following conservative surgical treatment of ectopic pregnancy Br J Obstet Gynecol 2003, 110:765-70.
11. Tahseen S Wijldes M A comparative case controlled study of laparoscopic versus laparotomic management for ectopic pregnancy: An evaluation of reproductive performance after radical versus conservative treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy Am J Obstet Gynaecol 2003, 23:189-90. 10.1080/ 0144361031000074781
12. Hajenius PJ Mol BWJ Ankum WM Veen Van der F Bossuyt PMM Lammes FB Clearance curves of serum human chorionic gonadotrophin for the diagnosis of persistent trophoblast Hum Reprod 1995, 10:683-7. 7782454
13. National Medical Register of the Organization for Dutch Health Care Information Utrecht, The Netherlands 1992.
14. Centre for disease Control Ectopic pregnancy surveillance in the United States 1970-87 MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1990, 39:401-3. 2112685
15. Bakken IJ Skjeldestad FE Time trends in ectopic pregnancies in a Norwegian county 1970-2004-a population-based study Hum Reprod 2006, 21(12):3132-6. 10.1093/humrep/del289 16931804
16. Rulin MC Is salpingostomy the surgical treatment of choice for unruptured tubal pregnancy? Obstet Gynecol 1995, 86:1010-1013. 10.1016/ 0029-7844(95)00330-T 7501323
17. Neumann PJ Gharib SD Weinstein MC The cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilization N Engl J Med 331(4):239-43. 1994 Jul 28 10.1056/ NEJM199407283310406 8015571
18. Mol BW Hajenius PJ Engelsbel S Ankum WM Hemrika DJ Veen van der F Bossuyt PM Is conservative surgery for tubal pregnancy preferable to salpingectomy? An economic analysis Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997, 104(7):834-9. 9236650