Misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis for ectopic and heterotopic pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

Abstract

This study examined the misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis factors for ectopic pregnancy (EP) and heterotopic pregnancy (HP) after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in an attempt to reduce the diagnostic error. Clinical data of patients who underwent IVF-ET treatment and had clinical pregnancy from 12463 cycles were retrospectively analyzed. Their findings of serum β-hCG test and transvaginal ultrasonography were also obtained during follow-up. These patients were divided into two groups according to the diagnosis accuracy of EP/HP: early diagnosis and misdiagnosis/delayed diagnosis. The results showed that the incidence of EP and HP was 3.8% (125/3286) and 0.8% (27/3286) respectively for IVF/ICSI-ET cycle, and 3.8% (55/1431) and 0.7% (10/1431) respectively for frozen- thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycle. Ruptured EP occurred in 28 patients due to initial misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis. Related factors fell in 3 categories: (1) clinician factors: misunderstanding of patients’ medical history, insufficient training in ultrasonography and unawareness of EP and HP; (2) patient factors: noncompliance with medical orders and lack of communication with clinicians; (3) complicated conditions of EP: atypical symptoms, delayed elevation of serum β-hCG level, early rupture of cornual EP, asymptomatic in early gestation and pregnancy of unknown location. All the factors were interwoven, contributing to the occurrence of EP and HP. It was concluded that complicated conditions are more likely to affect the diagnosis accuracy of EP/HP after IVF-ET. Transvaginal ultrasonography should be performed at 5 weeks of gestation. Intensive follow-up including repeated ultrasonography and serial serum β-hCG tests should be performed in patients with a suspicious diagnosis at admission.

Keywords

ectopic pregnancy / heterotopic pregnancy / misdiagnosis / assisted reproductive technology / early diagnosis

References

[1] JuneauC, BatesGW. Reproductive outcomes after medical and surgical management of ectopic pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 55(2): 455-460

[2] RosmanER, KeeganDA, KreyL, et al.. Ectopic pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization: a look at the donor egg population. Fertil Steril, 2009, 92(5): 1791-1793

[3] Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology; American Society for Reproductive Medicine.. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 2001 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology registry. Fertil Steril, 2007, 87(6): 1253-1266

[4] MilkiAA, JunSH. Ectopic pregnancy rates with day 3 versus day 5 embryo transfer: a retrospective analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2003, 3(1): 7

[5] FarquharCM. Ectopic pregnancy. Lancet, 2005, 366(9485): 583-591

[6] MalakM, TawfeeqT, HolzerH, et al.. Risk factors for ectopic pregnancy after in vitro fertilization treatment. J Obstet Gynaecol Can, 2011, 33(6): 617-619

[7] CasikarI, ReidS, CondousG. Ectopic pregnancy: Ultrasound diagnosis in modern management. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 55(2): 402-409

[8] van MelloNM, ZietseCS, MolF, et al.. Severe maternal morbidity in ectopic pregnancy is not associated with maternal factors but may be associated with quality of care. Fertil Steril, 2012, 97(3): 623-629

[9] OrjiEO, FasubaaOB, AdeyemiB, et al.. Mortality and morbidity associated with misdiagnosis of ectopic pregnancy in a defined Nigerian population. J Obstet Gynaecol, 2002, 22(5): 548-550

[10] SeeberBE. What serial hCG can tell you, and cannot tell you, about an early pregnancy. Fertil Steril, 2012, 98(5): 1074-1077

[11] KirkE, CondousG, BourneT. Pregnancies of unknown location. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2009, 23(4): 493-499

[12] ClaytonHB, SchieveLA, PetersonHB, et al.. A comparison of heterotopic and intrauterine-only pregnancy outcomes after assisted reproductive technologies in the United States from 1999 to 2002. Fertil Steril, 2007, 87(2): 303-309

[13] RosnerF. Patient noncompliance: causes and solutions. Mt Sinai J Med, 2006, 73(2): 553-559

[14] BaronKT, BabagbemiKT, ArleoEK, et al.. Emergent complications of assisted reproduction: expecting the unexpected. Radiographics, 2013, 33(1): 229-244

[15] GibsonKR, HorneAW. . Ruptured heterotopic pregnancy: an unusual presentation of an uncommon clinical problem. BMJ Case Rep, 2012

[16] SeeberBE, SammelMD, GuoW, et al.. Application of redefined human chorionic gonadotropin curves for the diagnosis of women at risk for ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril, 2006, 86(2): 454-459

[17] BarnhartKT. Clinical practice. Ectopic pregnancy. N Engl J Med, 2009, 361(4): 379-387

[18] CarazoHB, Perez-EzquerraBR, SanzLA, et al.. Uterine rupture of a cornual pregnancy: an obstetric emergency. Ginecol Obstet Mex, 2012, 80(7): 491-494

[19] SeshadriS, ShirleyP, JaiganeshT, et al.. In vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer for bilateral salpingectomies results in a ruptured ovarian ectopic pregnancy due to a tubal stump fistula: a case report and review of the literature. BMJ Case Rep, 2010

[20] ShapiroBS, DaneshmandST, De LeonL, et al.. Frozen- thawed embryo transfer is associated with a significantly reduced incidence of ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril, 2012, 98(6): 1490-1494

[21] IshiharaO, KuwaharaA, SaitohH. Frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer reduces ectopic pregnancy risk: an analysis of single embryo transfer cycles in Japan. Fertil Steril, 2011, 95(6): 1966-1969