Review of Treatment Outcomes for Caesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy
Author Information
Author(s): Nijjar Simrit, Sandhar Simarjit, Timor‐Tritsch Ilan E., Agten Andrea Kaelin, Li Jin, Chong Krystle Y., Oza Munira, Acklom Rosanna, D'Antonio Francesco, Vuong Lan N., Mol Ben, Bottomley Cecilia, Jurkovic Davor
Primary Institution: EGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London
Hypothesis
What are the outcomes reported in studies on treatment for Caesarean scar ectopic pregnancy?
Conclusion
There is significant variation in outcomes reported in studies on Caesarean scar ectopic pregnancy treatment, highlighting the need for standardized outcome reporting.
Supporting Evidence
- 108 studies were included, reporting on 17,941 women.
- 83% of studies originated from China.
- 326 outcomes were reported across the studies.
- Only 10% of studies defined a primary outcome.
- The median quality of outcome reporting was 3 out of 6.
Takeaway
This study looked at many reports about treating a specific pregnancy problem and found that different studies talk about different things, which makes it hard to know what works best.
Methodology
The review included 108 studies with a sample size of at least 50 women, assessing treatment outcomes and reporting quality.
Potential Biases
Common reasons for bias included retrospective methodology and lack of random selection of participants.
Limitations
The majority of studies were retrospective and lacked high-quality randomized controlled trials.
Participant Demographics
83% of studies originated from China, with the remaining from various countries including the UK, USA, and Italy.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p=0.116
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website