Tubal ectopic pregnancy: comparative management between pre and Covid-19 pandemic periods.

Lumi Tomishige Chaves, Rafael Maia, Alberto Borges Peixoto, Edward Araujo, Júlio Elito
{"title":"Tubal ectopic pregnancy: comparative management between pre and Covid-19 pandemic periods.","authors":"Lumi Tomishige Chaves, Rafael Maia, Alberto Borges Peixoto, Edward Araujo, Júlio Elito","doi":"10.61622/rbgo/2024rbgo64","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate whether there were differences in the presentation of patients with tubal ectopic pregnancy (EP) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study of all cases of tubal EP between March 2019 and March 2020 (pre-pandemic) and between March 2020 and March 2021 (pandemic). We compared between these two groups the risk factors, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, sonographic aspects, treatment applied and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We had 150 EP diagnoses during the two years studied, of which 135 were tubal EP. Of these, 65 were included in the pre-pandemic and 70 in the pandemic period. The prevalence of lower abdominal pain was significantly higher in the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period (91.4% vs. 78.1%, p=0.031). There was no significant difference in shock index, initial beta-hCG level, hemoglobin level at diagnosis, days of menstrual delay, aspect of the adnexal mass, amount of free fluid on ultrasound, and intact or ruptured presentation between the groups. Expectant management was significantly higher during the pandemic period (40.0% vs. 18.5%, p=0.008), surgical management was lower during the pandemic period (47.1% vs. 67.7%, p=0.023), and number of days hospitalized was lower in the pandemic period (1.3 vs. 2.0 days, p=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We did not observe a significant difference in patient history, laboratory and ultrasound characteristics. Abdominal pain was more common during the pandemic period. Regarding treatment, we observed a significant increase in expectant and a decrease in surgical cases during the pandemic period.</p>","PeriodicalId":74699,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11460413/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61622/rbgo/2024rbgo64","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether there were differences in the presentation of patients with tubal ectopic pregnancy (EP) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all cases of tubal EP between March 2019 and March 2020 (pre-pandemic) and between March 2020 and March 2021 (pandemic). We compared between these two groups the risk factors, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, sonographic aspects, treatment applied and complications.

Results: We had 150 EP diagnoses during the two years studied, of which 135 were tubal EP. Of these, 65 were included in the pre-pandemic and 70 in the pandemic period. The prevalence of lower abdominal pain was significantly higher in the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period (91.4% vs. 78.1%, p=0.031). There was no significant difference in shock index, initial beta-hCG level, hemoglobin level at diagnosis, days of menstrual delay, aspect of the adnexal mass, amount of free fluid on ultrasound, and intact or ruptured presentation between the groups. Expectant management was significantly higher during the pandemic period (40.0% vs. 18.5%, p=0.008), surgical management was lower during the pandemic period (47.1% vs. 67.7%, p=0.023), and number of days hospitalized was lower in the pandemic period (1.3 vs. 2.0 days, p=0.003).

Conclusion: We did not observe a significant difference in patient history, laboratory and ultrasound characteristics. Abdominal pain was more common during the pandemic period. Regarding treatment, we observed a significant increase in expectant and a decrease in surgical cases during the pandemic period.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
输卵管异位妊娠:Covid-19 大流行前和 Covid-19 大流行期间的管理比较。
目的评估在COVID-19大流行的第一年,输卵管异位妊娠(EP)患者的表现是否存在差异:我们对 2019 年 3 月至 2020 年 3 月(大流行前)和 2020 年 3 月至 2021 年 3 月(大流行)期间的所有输卵管异位妊娠病例进行了回顾性队列研究。我们比较了两组病例的风险因素、临床特征、实验室数据、声像图、治疗方法和并发症:在研究的两年中,我们共诊断出 150 例 EP,其中 135 例为输卵管 EP。其中 65 例发生在大流行前,70 例发生在大流行期间。与大流行前相比,大流行期间下腹痛的发生率明显更高(91.4% 对 78.1%,P=0.031)。两组之间在休克指数、初始β-hCG水平、诊断时的血红蛋白水平、月经推迟天数、附件包块的外形、超声波检查游离液体量、完整或破裂表现等方面没有明显差异。大流行期间的妊高症处理率明显较高(40.0% 对 18.5%,P=0.008),大流行期间的手术处理率较低(47.1% 对 67.7%,P=0.023),大流行期间的住院天数较低(1.3 对 2.0 天,P=0.003):我们没有观察到患者病史、实验室和超声波特征有明显差异。大流行期间腹痛更为常见。在治疗方面,我们观察到大流行期间预产期病例明显增加,手术病例减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Syphilis and pregnancy. Immunosuppressants in women with repeated implantation failure in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Multidisciplinary team training in postpartum hemorrhage: impact on the use of blood products. Neonatal and maternal outcomes of mRNA versus Non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. A new screening of preterm birth in gestation with short cervix after pessary plus progesterone.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1