Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2017; 77(04): 335-339
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-100107
GebFra Science
Review
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Recurrent Interstitial Pregnancy: a Review of the Literature

Wiederauftreten einer interstitiellen Schwangerschaft: eine Literaturübersicht
Eva Egger
1   University of Bonn, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology/CIO, Bonn, Germany
2   Florence Nightingale Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Düsseldorf, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 21 October 2016
revised 19 December 2016

accepted 22 December 2016

Publication Date:
26 April 2017 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Interstitial pregnancies account for 2–4 % of all ectopic pregnancies. Despite its rarity, various treatment options exist. However, no gold standard has yet been defined and data regarding recurrence of interstitial pregnancies in subsequent pregnancies after different treatments are sparse. This makes it very difficult to provide adequate patient counselling for treatment options with regards to the treatment-related risk of recurrence. The present literature review demonstrates that recurrent interstitial pregnancy is a rare condition and more likely when additional anatomy-related risk factors for ectopic pregnancies are present, such as hydrosalpinges, blocked tubes, endometriosis, fibroids or prior tubal ectopic pregnancies. Therefore, at first appearance and in absence of additional anatomy-related risk factors, methotrexate intravenously, intramuscularly or into the amnion may be the first choice. In case of anatomical risk factors, cornual wedge resection seems to be first choice. In case of recurrence, cornual wedge resection is particularly justified in patients with anatomical alterations of the salpinges. The role of conservative surgical treatments in recurrence as cornuotomy, salpingectomy, endoloop ligation and resection and curettage under laparoscopic guidance remains unclear due to sparse data.

Zusammenfassung

Nur circa 2–4 % aller ektopen Graviditäten liegen interstitiell. Trotz ihrer Seltenheit gibt es eine Reihe verschiedener Behandlungsoptionen. Aufgrund vieler Einzelfallberichte mit unterschiedlichen therapeutischen Herangehensweisen gibt es keinen Goldstandard und Daten zum Rezidivrisiko in Abhängigkeit zur gewählten Therapie fehlen. Das Rezidivrisiko ist für die adäquate Beratung der Patientin hinsichtlich ihrer Therapiemöglichkeiten aber eine wichtige Information. Diese Literaturübersicht zeigt, dass eine wiederholt auftretende interstitielle Schwangerschaft selten ist. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines erneuten Auftretens ist höher bei Vorliegen zusätzlicher anatomischer Risikofaktoren für ektope Schwangerschaften, wie Hydrosalpinx, Tubenobstruktion, Endometriose, Uterusmyome oder eine frühere ektope Tubargravidität. Bei Primärauftreten einer interstitiellen Schwangerschaft und ohne Nachweis anatomischer Risikofaktoren erscheint eine medikamentöse Behandlung mit Methotrexat systemisch oder lokal zielführend. Bei Vorliegen von anatomischen Risikofaktoren und weiterem Kinderwunsch sowie im Rezidivfall erscheint dagegen eine Keilresektion des entsprechenden Uterushorns sinnvoll. Aufgrund der eingeschränkten Datenlage und fehlender Studien bleibt der Stellenwert konservativer operativer Maßnahmen, wie die Uterushorneröffnung, die Salpingektomie, die Endoloop-Resektion bzw. die Kürettage unter laparoskopischer Kontrolle noch unklar.

Key words

ectopic pregnancy - interstitial pregnancy - angular pregnancy - cornual pregnancy - recurrent ectopic pregnancy

Schlüsselwörter

ektope Schwangerschaft - interstitielle Schwangerschaft - anguläre Schwangerschaft - Uterushornschwangerschaft - erneute ektope Schwangerschaft
 

  • References

  • 1 Siow A, Ng S. Laparoscopic management of 4 cases of recurrent cornual ectopic pregnancy and review of literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18: 296-302
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Vilos GA. Laparoscopic ligation and resection of two ipsilateral interstitial pregnancies in the same patient. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2001; 8: 299-302
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bouyer J, Coste J, Fernandez H. et al. Sites of ectopic pregnancy: a 10 year population-based study of 1800 cases. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 3224-3230
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Simpson J, Alford C, Miller A. Interstitial pregnancy following homolateral salpingectomy. A report of 6 new cases and review of the literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1961; 82: 1173-1179
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Faraj R, Steel M. Can we reduce the recurrence of cornual pregnancy? A case report. Gynecol Surg 2008; 6: 57-59
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Tanaka T, Hayashi H, Kutsuzawa T. et al. Treatment of interstitial ectopic pregnancy with methotrexate: report of a successful case. Fertil Steril 1982; 37: 851-852
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lau S, Tulandi T. Conservative medical and surgical management of interstitial ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril 1999; 72: 207-215
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Fernandez H, Capmas P, Lucot JP. et al. GROG. Fertility after ectopic pregnancy: the DEMETER randomized trial. Hum Reprod 2013; 28: 1247-1253
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Vandenberghe G, De Blaere M, Van Leeuw V. et al. Nationwide population-based cohort study of uterine rupture in Belgium: results from the Belgian Obstetric Surveillance System. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e010415
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Sagiv R, Golan A, Arbel-Alon S. et al. Three conservative approaches to treatment of interstitial pregnancy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2001; 8: 154-158
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 van der Weiden RM, Karsdorp VH. Recurrent cornual pregnancy after heterotopic cornual pregnancy successfully treated with systemic methotrexate. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005; 273: 180-181
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Shaw JL, Dey SK, Critchley HO. et al. Current knowledge of the aetiology of human tubal ectopic pregnancy. Hum Reprod Update 2010; 16: 432-444
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Sungurtekin U, Uyar Y. Recurrent interstitial pregnancy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 38: 438-440
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Wittich AC. Recurrent cornual ectopic pregnancy in a patient with leiomyomata uteri. J Am Osteopath Assoc 1998; 98: 332-333
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Budnick SG, Jacobs SL, Nulsen JC. et al. Conservative management of interstitial pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1993; 48: 694-698
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Maruthini D, Sharma V. A case of live birth after uterine reconstruction for recurrent cornual ectopic pregnancy following IVF treatment. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol 2013; 2013: 625261
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Douysset X, Verspyck E, Diguet A. et al. [Interstitial pregnancy: experience at Rouenʼs hospital]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2014; 42: 216-221
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hwang JH, Lee JK, Lee NW. et al. Open cornual resection versus laparoscopic cornual resection in patients with interstitial ectopic pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011; 156: 78-82
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Faleyimu BL, Igberase GO, Momoh MO. Ipsilateral ectopic pregnancy occurring in the stump of a previous ectopic site: a case report. Cases J 2008; 1: 343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Sahoo S, Jose J, Shah N. et al. Recurrent cornual ectopic pregnancies. Gynecol Surg 2009; 6: 389-391
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Downey GP, Tuck SM. Spontaneous uterine rupture during subsequent pregnancy following non-excision of an interstitial ectopic gestation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101: 162-163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar