Conventional and modern markers of pregnancy of unknown location: Update and narrative review

Pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) is a temporary pathologic or physiologic phenomenon of early pregnancy that requires follow up to determine the final pregnancy outcome. Evidence indicated that PUL patients suffer a remarkably higher rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes, represented by ectopic gestation and early pregnancy loss, than the general population. In the past few decades, discussion about PUL has never stopped, and a variety of markers have been widely investigated for the early and accurate evaluation of PUL, including serum biomarkers, ultrasound imaging features, multivariate analysis, and the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy based on risk stratification. So far, machine learning (ML) methods represented by M4 and M6 logistic regression have gained a level of recognition and are continually improving. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity of PUL markers, mainly caused by the limited sample size, the differences in population and technical maturity, etc., have hampered the management of PUL. With the advancement of multidisciplinary integration and cutting-edge technologies (e.g. artificial intelligence, prediction model development, and telemedicine), novel markers, and strategies for the management of PUL are expected to be developed. In this review, we summarize both conventional and novel markers (represented by artificial intelligence) for PUL assessment and management, investigate their advancements, limitations and challenges, and propose insights on future research direction and clinical application.

Diagnostic accuracy validation study of the M6 model without initial serum progesterone (M6NP) in triage of pregnancy of unknown location

OBJECTIVES

The M6 prediction model stratifies the risk of development of ectopic pregnancy (EP) for women with pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) into low risk or high risk, using human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) and progesterone levels at the initial visit to a gynaecological emergency room and hCG level at 48 h. This study evaluated a second model, the M6NP model, which does not include the progesterone level at the initial visit. The main aim of this study was to validate the diagnostic accuracy of the M6NP model in a population of French women.

STUDY DESIGN

Between January and December 2021, all women with an hCG measurement from the gynaecological emergency department of a teaching hospital were screened for inclusion in this study. Women with a pregnancy location determined before or at the second visit were excluded. The diagnostic test was based on logistic regression of the M6NP model, with classification into two groups: high risk of EP (≥5%) and low risk of EP (<5%). The reference test was the final outcome based on clinical, biological and sonographic results: failed PUL (FPUL), intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) or EP. Diagnostic performance for risk prediction of EP, and also IUP and FPUL, was calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 759 women with possible PUL were identified. After screening, 341 women with PUL were included in the main analysis. Of these, 186 (54.5%) were classified as low risk, including three (1.6%) with a final outcome of EP. The remaining 155 women with PUL were classified as high risk, of whom 60 (38.7%), 66 (42.8%) and 29 (18.7%) had a final outcome of FPUL, IUP and EP, respectively. Of the 32 women with PUL with a final outcome of EP, 29 (90.6%) were classified as high risk and three (9.4%) were classified as low risk. Therefore, the performance of the M6NP model to predict EP had a negative predictive value of 98.4%, a positive predictive value of 18.7%, sensitivity of 90.6% and specificity of 59.2%. If the prediction model had been used, it is estimated that 4.5 visits per patient could have been prevented.

CONCLUSION

The M6NP model could be used safely in the French population for risk stratification of PUL. Its use in clinical practice should result in a substantial reduction in the number of visits to a gynaecological emergency room.

Updating M6 pregnancy of unknown location risk-prediction model including evaluation of clinical factors

OBJECTIVES

Ectopic pregnancy (EP) is a major high-risk outcome following a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) classification. Biochemical markers are used to triage PUL as high vs low risk to guide appropriate follow-up. The M6 model is currently the best risk-prediction model. We aimed to update the M6 model and evaluate whether performance can be improved by including clinical factors.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study recruited consecutive PUL between January 2015 and January 2017 at eight units (Phase 1), with two centers continuing recruitment between January 2017 and March 2021 (Phase 2). Serum samples were collected routinely and sent for β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) and progesterone measurement. Clinical factors recorded were maternal age, pain score, bleeding score and history of EP. Based on transvaginal ultrasonography and/or biochemical confirmation during follow-up, PUL were classified subsequently as failed PUL (FPUL), intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) or EP (including persistent PUL (PPUL)). The M6 models with (M6P ) and without (M6NP ) progesterone were refitted and extended with clinical factors. Model validation was performed using internal-external cross-validation (IECV) (Phase 1) and temporal external validation (EV) (Phase 2). Missing values were handled using multiple imputation.

RESULTS

Overall, 5473 PUL were recruited over both phases. A total of 709 PUL were excluded because maternal age was < 16 years or initial β-hCG was ≤ 25 IU/L, leaving 4764 (87%) PUL for analysis (2894 in Phase 1 and 1870 in Phase 2). For the refitted M6P model, the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) for EP/PPUL vs IUP/FPUL was 0.89 for IECV and 0.84-0.88 for EV, with respective sensitivities of 94% and 92-93%. For the refitted M6NP model, the AUCs were 0.85 for IECV and 0.82-0.86 for EV, with respective sensitivities of 92% and 93-94%. Calibration performance was good overall, but with heterogeneity between centers. Net Benefit confirmed clinical utility. The change in AUC when M6P was extended to include maternal age, bleeding score and history of EP was between -0.02 and 0.01, depending on center and phase. The corresponding change in AUC when M6NP was extended was between -0.01 and 0.03. At the 5% threshold to define high risk of EP/PPUL, extending M6P altered sensitivity by -0.02 to -0.01, specificity by 0.03 to 0.04 and Net Benefit by -0.005 to 0.006. Extending M6NP altered sensitivity by -0.03 to -0.01, specificity by 0.05 to 0.07 and Net Benefit by -0.005 to 0.006.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated M6 model offers accurate diagnostic performance, with excellent sensitivity for EP. Adding clinical factors to the model improved performance in some centers, especially when progesterone levels were not suitable or unavailable. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin point of care testing for the management of pregnancy of unknown location

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does a commercially available quantitative beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (BHCG) point of care testing (POCT) device improve workflow management in early pregnancy by performing comparably to gold standard laboratory methods, and is the performance of a validated pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) triage strategy maintained using POCT BHCG results?

DESIGN

Women classified with a PUL between 2018 and 2021 at three early pregnancy units were included. The linear relationship of untreated whole-blood POCT and serum laboratory BHCG values was defined using coefficients and regression. Paired serial BHCG values were then incorporated into the validated M6 multinomial logistic regression model to stratify the PUL as at high risk or at low risk of clinical complications. The sensitivity and negative predictive value were assessed. The timings required for equivocal POCT and laboratory care pathways were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 462 PUL were included. The discrepancy between 571 laboratory and POCT BHCG values was -5.2% (-6.2 IU/l), with a correlation coefficient of 0.96. The 133 PUL with paired 0 and 48 h BHCG values were compared using the M6 model. The sensitivity for high-risk outcomes (96.2%) and negative predictive values (98.5%) was excellent for both. Sample receipt and laboratory processing took 135 min (421 timings), compared with 12 min (91 timings) when using POCT (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

POCT BHCG values correlated well with laboratory testing measurements. The M6 model retained its performance when using POCT BHCG values. Using the model with POCT may improve workflow and patient care without compromising on effective PUL triage.

Lactate plasma level as a potential biomarker in early diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy: A case-control survey

Introduction

A novel metabolomics survey proposed lactic acid as a diagnostic biomarker to detect ectopic pregnancy (EP). Here we investigate the plasma level of lactate for early diagnosis of EP as a potential biomarker.

Methods

In a case-control study, the reproductive aged women with definite tubal EP (6-10 weeks' gestation), referred to our department during 2021-2022, considered as case group, and women with normal singleton pregnancy in the same gestational age as control group. After informed concept, demographic data (maternal and gestational age and parity) recorded and 5 mL venous blood samples were taken to detect the lactate plasma level. The data analyzed using SPSS software ver22.

Results

Finally, 95 participations (50 in case and 45 in control group) enrolled. The clinical results showed that the most of case group were aged more than 35 years old with had higher parity and body mass index, but, no statistically significant difference showed up. On the other hand, although the lactate level was slightly higher in women with EP, but, the plasma lactate level did not statistically differ between the two study groups. Also, the logistic regression showed no relationship between the demographic variables and the lactate plasma level.

Conclusion

It seems that the plasma level of lactate cannot be a diagnostic biomarker for EP.

Pregnancy of unknown location: external validation of the hCG-based M6NP and M4 prediction models in an emergency gynaecology unit

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if M6NP predicting ectopic pregnancy (EP) among women with pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) is valid in an emergency gynaecology setting and comparing it with its predecessor M4.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Women with PUL.

METHODS

All consecutive women with a PUL during a study period of 3 years were screened for inclusion. Risk prediction of an EP was based on two serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) levels taken at least 24 hours and no longer than 72 hours apart.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The area under the ROC curve (AUC) expressed the ability of a model to distinguish an EP from a non-EP (discrimination). Calibration assessed the agreement between the predicted risk of an EP and the true risk (proportion) of EP. The proportion of EPs and non-EPs classified as high risk assessed the model's sensitivity and false positive rate (FPR). The proportion of non-EPs among women classified as low risk was the model's negative predictive value (NPV). The clinical utility of a model was evaluated with decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

1061 women were included in the study, of which 238 (22%) had a final diagnosis of EP. The AUC for EP was 0.85 for M6NP and 0.81 for M4. M6NP made accurate risk predictions of EP up to predictions of 20% but thereafter risks were underestimated. M4 was poorly calibrated up to risk predictions of 40%. With a 5% threshold for high risk classification the sensitivity for EP was 95% for M6NP, the FPR 50% and NPV 97%. M6NP had higher sensitivity and NPV than M4 but also a higher FPR. M6NP had utility at all thresholds as opposed to M4 that had no utility at thresholds≤5%.

CONCLUSIONS

M6NP had better predictive performance than M4 and is valid in women with PUL attending an emergency gynaecology unit. Our results can encourage implementation of M6NP in related yet untested clinical settings to effectively support clinical decision-making.

Evaluating cut-off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There is no global agreement on how to best determine pregnancy of unknown location viability and location using biomarkers. Measurements of progesterone and β human chorionic gonadotropin (βhCG) are still used in clinical practice to exclude the possibility of a viable intrauterine pregnancy (VIUP). We evaluate the predictive value of progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio cut-off levels to exclude a VIUP in women with a pregnancy of unknown location.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of prospective multicenter study data of consecutive women with a pregnancy of unknown location between January 2015 and 2017 collected from dedicated early pregnancy assessment units of eight hospitals. Single progesterone and serial βhCG measurements were taken. Women were followed up until final pregnancy outcome between 11 and 14 weeks of gestation was confirmed using transvaginal ultrasonography: (1) VIUP, (2) non-viable intrauterine pregnancy or failed pregnancy of unknown location, and (3) ectopic pregnancy or persisting pregnancy of unknown location. The predictive value of cut-off levels for ruling out VIUP were evaluated across a range of values likely to be encountered clinically for progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio.

RESULTS

Data from 2507 of 3272 (76.6%) women were suitable for analysis. All had data for βhCG levels, 2248 (89.7%) had progesterone levels, and 1809 (72.2%) had βhCG ratio. The likelihood of viability falls with the progesterone level. Although the median progesterone level associated with viability was 59 nmol/L, VIUP were identified with levels as low as 5 nmol/L. No single βhCG cut-off reliably ruled out the presence of viability with certainty, even when the level was more than 3000 IU/L, there were 39/358 (11%) women who had a VIUP. The probability of viability decreases with the βhCG ratio. Although the median βhCG ratio associated with viability was 2.26, VIUP were identified with ratios as low as 1.02. A progesterone level below 2 nmol/L and βhCG ratio below 0.87 were unlikely to be associated with viability but were not definitive when considering multiple imputation.

CONCLUSIONS

Cut-off levels for βhCG, βhCG ratio, and progesterone are not safe to be used clinically to exclude viability in early pregnancy. Although βhCG ratio and progesterone have slightly better performance in comparison, single βhCG used in this manner is highly unreliable.

External validation of models to predict the outcome of pregnancies of unknown location: a multicentre cohort study

Objective

To validate externally five approaches to predict ectopic pregnancy (EP) in pregnancies of unknown location (PUL): the M6P and M6NP risk models, the two‐step triage strategy (2ST, which incorporates M6P), the M4 risk model, and beta human chorionic gonadotropin ratio cut‐offs (BhCG‐RC).

Design

Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.

Setting

Eight UK early pregnancy assessment units.

Population

Women presenting with a PUL and BhCG >25 IU/l.

Methods

Women were managed using the 2ST protocol: PUL were classified as low risk of EP if presenting progesterone ≤2 nmol/l; the remaining cases returned 2 days later for triage based on M6P. EP risk ≥5% was used to classify PUL as high risk. Missing values were imputed, and predictions for the five approaches were calculated post hoc. We meta‐analysed centre‐specific results.

Main outcome measures

Discrimination, calibration and clinical utility (decision curve analysis) for predicting EP.

Results

Of 2899 eligible women, the primary analysis excluded 297 (10%) women who were lost to follow up. The area under the ROC curve for EP was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86–0.91) for M6P, 0.88 (0.86–0.90) for 2ST, 0.86 (0.83–0.88) for M6NP and 0.82 (0.78–0.85) for M4. Sensitivities for EP were 96% (M6P), 94% (2ST), 92% (N6NP), 80% (M4) and 58% (BhCG‐RC); false‐positive rates were 35%, 33%, 39%, 24% and 13%. M6P and 2ST had the best clinical utility and good overall calibration, with modest variability between centres.

Conclusions

2ST and M6P performed best for prediction and triage in PUL.

Tweetable abstract

The M6 model, as part of a two‐step triage strategy, is the best approach to characterise and triage PULs.

The M6 model, as part of a two‐step triage strategy, is the best approach to characterise and triage PULs.

How do the M4 and M6 models perform in an Australian pregnancy of unknown location population?

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) is made when there is an elevated serum β human chorionic gonadotropin (βhCG) and no pregnancy on transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound. Most of these pregnancies end as intra-uterine pregnancies or unsuccessful pregnancies and can be safely managed expectantly. However, up to 20% of these women will have an ectopic pregnancy. Several mathematical models, including the M4 and M6 protocols, have been developed using biochemical markers to triage PUL presentations. This rationalises numbers of tests and visits made without compromising safety and allowing timely intervention.

AIMS

We aimed to externally validate the M4 and M6 models in an Australian tertiary early pregnancy assessment service (EPAS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective single-centre cohort study across five years. Our study population included all women attending our EPAS with a PUL who had at least two serum βhCG levels and one progesterone level measured. The M4 and M6 models were retrospectively applied.

RESULTS

Of the 360 women in the study population, there were 26 confirmed ectopic pregnancies (7.2%) and six persisting PULs (2%). The M4 model had a sensitivity and specificity of 72%. The M6P model had a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 63%. The M6P misclassified two ectopic pregnancies into the low-risk group, compared with seven in the M4 model.

CONCLUSIONS

The M6P model has the highest sensitivity of the three models and a negative predictive value of 99%. These numbers are comparable to the original United Kingdom population. Further prospective validation is planned.

External validation of risk prediction model M4 in an Australian population: Rationalising the management of pregnancies of unknown location

BACKGROUND

The prediction model M4 can successfully classify pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) into a low- or high-risk group in developing ectopic pregnancy. M4 was validated in UK centres but in very few other countries outside UK.

AIM

To validate the M4 model's ability to correctly classify PULs in a cohort of Australian women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of women classified with PUL, attending a Sydney-based teaching hospital between 2006 and 2018. The reference standard was the final characterisation of PUL: failed PUL (FPUL) or intrauterine pregnancy (IUP; low risk) vs ectopic pregnancy (EP) or persistent PUL (PPUL; high risk). Each patient was entered into the M4 model calculator and an estimated risk of FPUL/IUP or EP/PPUL was recorded. Diagnostic accuracy of the M4 model was evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 9077 consecutive women who underwent transvaginal sonography, 713 (7.9%) classified with a PUL. Six hundred and seventy-seven (95.0%) had complete study data and were included. Final outcomes were: 422 (62.3%) FPULs, 150 (22.2%) IUPs, 105 (15.5%) EPs and PPULs. The M4 model classified 455 (67.2%) as low-risk PULs of which 434 (95.4%) were FPULs/IUPs and 21 (4.6%) were EPs or PPULs. EPs/PPULs were correctly classified with sensitivity of 80.0% (95% CI 71.1-86.5%), specificity of 75.9% (95% CI 72.2-79.3%), positive predictive value of 37.8% (95% CI 33.8-42.1%) and negative predictive value of 95.3% (95% CI 93.1-96.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

We have externally validated the prediction model M4. It classified 67.2% of PULs as low risk, of which 95.4% were later characterised as FPULs or IUPs while still classifying 80.0% of EPs as high risk.

Triaging women with pregnancy of unknown location using two-step protocol including M6 model: clinical implementation study

OBJECTIVE

The M6 risk-prediction model was published as part of a two-step protocol using an initial progesterone level of ≤ 2 nmol/L to identify probable failing pregnancies (Step 1) followed by the M6 model (Step 2). The M6 model has been shown to have good triage performance for stratifying women with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) as being at low or high risk of harboring an ectopic pregnancy (EP). This study validated the triage performance of the two-step protocol in clinical practice by evaluating the number of protocol-related adverse events and how effectively patients were triaged.

METHODS

This was a prospective multicenter interventional study of 3272 women with a PUL, carried out between January 2015 and January 2017 in four district general hospitals and four university teaching hospitals in the UK. The final pregnancy outcome was defined as: a failed PUL (FPUL), an intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) or an EP (including persistent PUL (PPUL)). FPUL and IUP were grouped as low-risk and EP/PPUL as high-risk PUL. Serum progesterone and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) levels were measured at presentation in all patients. If the initial progesterone level was ≤ 2 nmol/L, patients were discharged and were asked to have a follow-up urine pregnancy test in 2 weeks to confirm a negative result. If the progesterone level was > 2 nmol/L or a measurement had not been taken, hCG level was measured again at 48 h and results were entered into the M6 model. Patients were managed according to the outcome predicted by the protocol. Those classified as 'low risk, probable FPUL' were advised to perform a urine pregnancy test in 2 weeks and those classified as 'low risk, probable IUP' were invited for a scan a week later. When a woman with a PUL was classified as high risk (i.e. risk of EP ≥ 5%) she was reviewed clinically within 48 h. One center used a progesterone cut-off of ≤ 10 nmol/L and its data were analyzed separately. If the recommended management protocol was not adhered to, this was recorded as a protocol deviation and classified as: unscheduled visit for clinician reason, unscheduled visit for patient reason or incorrect timing of blood test or ultrasound scan. The classifications outlined in the UK Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines were used to evaluate the incidence of adverse events. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 3272 women with a PUL, 2625 were included in the final analysis (317 met the exclusion criteria or were lost to follow-up, while 330 were evaluated using a progesterone cut-off of ≤ 10 nmol/L). Initial progesterone results were available for 2392 (91.1%) patients. In Step 1, 407 (15.5%) patients were classified as low risk (progesterone ≤ 2 nmol/L), of whom seven (1.7%) were ultimately diagnosed with an EP. In 279 of the remaining 2218 women with a PUL, the M6 model was not applied owing to protocol deviation or because the outcome was already known (usually on the basis of an ultrasound scan) before a second hCG reading was taken; of these patients, 30 were diagnosed with an EP. In Step 2, 1038 women with a PUL were classified as low risk, of whom eight (0.8%) had a final outcome of EP. Of 901 women classified as high risk at Step 2, 275 (30.5%) had an EP. Therefore, 275/320 (85.9%) EPs were correctly classified as high risk. Overall, 1445/2625 PUL (55.0%) were classified as low risk, of which 15 (1.0%) were EP. None of these cases resulted in a ruptured EP or significant clinical harm. Sixty-two women participating in the study had an adverse event, but no woman had a serious adverse event as defined in the UK GCP guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that the two-step protocol incorporating the M6 model effectively triaged the majority of women with a PUL as being at low risk of an EP, minimizing the follow-up required for these patients after just two visits. There were few misclassified EPs and none of these women came to significant clinical harm or suffered a serious adverse clinical event. The two-step protocol incorporating the M6 model is an effective and clinically safe way of rationalizing the management of women with a PUL. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Deregulation of miR-324/KISS1/kisspeptin in early ectopic pregnancy: mechanistic findings with clinical and diagnostic implications

BACKGROUND

Ectopic pregnancy is a life-threatening condition for which novel screening tools that would enable early accurate diagnosis would improve clinical outcomes. Kisspeptins, encoded by KISS1, play an essential role in human reproduction, at least partially by regulating placental function and possibly embryo implantation. Kisspeptin levels are elevated massively in normal pregnancy and reportedly altered in various gestational pathologic diseases. Yet, the pathophysiologic role of KISS1/kisspeptin in ectopic pregnancy has not been investigated previously.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes of KISS1/kisspeptin levels in ectopic pregnancy and their underlaying molecular mechanisms and to ascertain the diagnostic implications of these changes.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 122 women with normal pregnancy who underwent voluntary termination of pregnancy and 84 patients who experienced tubal ectopic pregnancy were recruited. Measurements of plasma kisspeptins and KISS1 expression analyses in human embryonic/placental tissue were conducted in ectopic pregnancy and voluntary termination of pregnancy control subjects during the early gestational window (<12 weeks). Putative microRNA regulators of KISS1 were predicted in silico, followed by expression analyses of selected microRNAs and validation of repressive interactions in vitro. Circulating levels of these microRNAs were also assayed in ectopic pregnancy vs voluntary termination of pregnancy.

RESULTS

Circulating kisspeptins gradually increased during the first trimester of normal pregnancy but were reduced markedly in ectopic pregnancy. This profile correlated with the expression levels of KISS1 in human embryonic/placental tissue, which increased in voluntary termination of pregnancy but remained suppressed in ectopic pregnancy. Bioinformatic predictions and expression analyses identified miR-27b-3p and miR-324-3p as putative repressors of KISS1 in human embryonic/placental tissue at <12 weeks gestation, when expression of microRNAs was low in voluntary termination of pregnancy control subjects but significantly increased in ectopic pregnancy. Yet, a significant repressive interaction was documented only for miR-324-3p, occurring at the predicted 3'-UTR of KISS1. Interestingly, circulating levels of miR-324-3p, but not of miR-27b-3p, were suppressed distinctly in ectopic pregnancy, despite elevated tissue expression of the pre-microRNA. A decision-tree model that used kisspeptin and miR-324-3p levels was successful in discriminating ectopic pregnancy vs voluntary termination of pregnancy, with a receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.95±0.02 (95% confidence interval).

CONCLUSION

Our results document a significant down-regulation of KISS1/kisspeptins in early stages of ectopic pregnancy via, at least partially, a repressive interaction with miR-324-3p. Our data identify circulating kisspeptins and miR-324-3p as putative biomarkers for accurate screening of ectopic pregnancy at early gestational ages.

Diagnostic protocols for the management of pregnancy of unknown location: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no international consensus on how to manage women with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL).

OBJECTIVES

To present a systematic quantitative review summarising the evidence related to management protocols for PUL.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, COCHRANE and DARE databases were searched from 1 January 1984 to 31 January 2017. The primary outcome was accurate risk prediction of women initially diagnosed with a PUL having an ectopic pregnancy (high risk) as opposed to either a failed PUL or intrauterine pregnancy (low risk).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All studies written in the English language, which were not case reports or series that assessed women classified as having a PUL at initial ultrasound.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Forty-three studies were included. QUADAS-2 criteria were used to assess the risk of bias. We used a novel, linear mixed-effects model and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves for the thresholds of interest.

MAIN RESULTS

There was a high risk of differential verification bias in most studies. Meta-analyses of accuracy were performed on (i) single human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) cut-off levels, (ii) hCG ratio (hCG at 48 hours/initial hCG), (iii) single progesterone cut-off levels and (iv) the 'M4 model' (a logistic regression model based on the initial hCG and hCG ratio). For predicting an ectopic pregnancy, the areas under the curves (95% CI) for these four management protocols were as follows: (i) 0.42 (0.00-0.99), (ii) 0.69 (0.57-0.78), (iii) 0.69 (0.54-0.81) and (iv) 0.87 (0.83-0.91), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The M4 model was the best available method for predicting a final outcome of ectopic pregnancy. Developing and validating risk prediction models may optimise the management of PUL.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Pregnancy of unknown location meta-analysis: M4 model has best test performance to predict ectopic pregnancy.

The potential value of activin B and fibronectin for the triage of pregnancies of unknown location and prediction of first trimester viability

Aim

We have assessed the potential predictive ability of the biomarkers activin B and fibronectin (FN1) alone and when added to established markers for triaging patients as being at low or high risk of ectopic pregnancy (EP). We also assessed their use as predictors of viability at 12 weeks gestation.

Methods

Exploratory secondary analysis of a prospective study including all women classified as a pregnancy of known location (PUL) based on transvaginal ultrasonography between January and December 2007 at the early pregnancy unit of St Georges' Hospital (London). We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the diagnostic potential of the biomarkers to triage PUL at high risk of complications (EP or persistent PUL), and standard binary logistic regression to predict first trimester viability at 12 weeks.

Results

For discriminating high-risk (n = 16) from low-risk PUL (n = 93), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.60-0.85) for activin B and 0.55 (0.41-0.68) for FN1. Adding activin B to a multinomial logistic regression model incorporating β-hCG ratio and initial progesterone yielded odds ratios of 0.16 (0.05-0.55) for failing vs high-risk PUL and 0.29 (0.07-1.19) for intrauterine vs high-risk PUL and increased the model's AUC from 0.84 to 0.89. At a risk threshold of 5% for high-risk PUL, sensitivity increased from 84% to 87% and specificity from 48% to 64%. For discriminating viable (n = 28) from non-viable (n = 81) pregnancies at 12 weeks, both markers had an AUC of 0.54.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that activin B may be a promising marker to improve PUL triage in addition to established markers.

Factors to consider in pregnancy of unknown location

The management of women with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) can vary significantly and often lacks a clear evidence base. Intensive follow-up is usually required for women with a final outcome of an ectopic pregnancy. This, however, only accounts for a small proportion of women with a pregnancy of unknown PUL location. There remains a clear clinical need to rationalize the follow-up of PUL so women at high risk of having a final outcome of an ectopic pregnancy are followed up more intensively and those PUL at low risk of having an ectopic pregnancy have their follow-up streamlined. This review covers the main management strategies published in the current literature and aims to give clinicians an overview of the most up-to-date evidence that they can take away into their everyday clinical practice when caring for women with a PUL.

Association between three-dimensional transvaginal sonographic markers and outcome of pregnancy of unknown location: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) transvaginal sonographic (TVS) parameters in predicting the evolution of a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL).

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study performed at the early pregnancy unit of a university hospital from September 2008 to June 2012. Women with a positive pregnancy test without any signs of intra- or extrauterine pregnancy at their first TVS examination were considered eligible and a 3D dataset containing the entire uterus was acquired. An experienced observer analyzed all 3D datasets for assessment of the following parameters: endometrial thickness, volume, mean gray-scale index and asymmetry. Women were followed until they were classified as having: (i) non-visualized pregnancy loss (NVPL); (ii) intrauterine pregnancy (IUP); or (iii) ectopic pregnancy or persistent PUL. We compared the values of the TVS parameters across the three groups. We also assessed the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of the 3D-TVS parameters in comparison to that for serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) ratio (48 h/baseline) to predict PUL outcome. We then evaluated whether combining the 3D-TVS parameters with serum β-hCG ratio improved the predictive accuracy for PUL outcome by performing a logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

During the study period 4939 consecutive pregnant women presented at the unit for their initial TVS examination and 325 (7%) were classified as having a PUL, of whom 161 women were enrolled and had a 3D scan of the uterus. However, 19 were excluded because of incomplete follow-up. Data from 142 women with PUL were therefore included in the analysis and the outcomes of these women were: NVPL in 98 (69%), IUP in 27 (19%) and ectopic pregnancy + persistent PUL in 14 + 3 = 17 (12%). Endometrial thickness, endometrial volume and the proportion of women with asymmetric endometrial shape differed significantly between the outcome groups. Endometrial thickness and volume could be used as reasonable predictors of both NVPL and IUP, whereas asymmetric endometrial shape and mean gray-scale index could be used as reasonable predictors of IUP only. The best single parameter to predict PUL outcomes was the β-hCG ratio. Regression analysis demonstrated that endometrial volume and endometrial shape asymmetry added significantly to the β-hCG ratio in predicting IUP but not NVPL.

CONCLUSIONS

3D-TVS markers have a low diagnostic accuracy in predicting PUL outcome. The addition of endometrial volume and shape asymmetry improves the accuracy of the β-hCG ratio in predicting IUP. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Managing pregnancy of unknown location based on initial serum progesterone and serial serum hCG levels: development and validation of a two-step triage protocol

OBJECTIVES

A uniform rationalized management protocol for pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) is lacking. We developed a two-step triage protocol to select PUL at high risk of ectopic pregnancy (EP), based on serum progesterone level at presentation (step 1) and the serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) ratio, defined as the ratio of hCG at 48 h to hCG at presentation (step 2).

METHODS

This was a cohort study of 2753 PUL (301 EP), involving a secondary analysis of prospectively and consecutively collected PUL data from two London-based university teaching hospitals. Using a chronological split we used 1449 PUL for development and 1304 for validation. We aimed to assign PUL as low risk with high confidence (high negative predictive value (NPV)) while classifying most EP as high risk (high sensitivity). The first triage step assigned PUL as low risk using a threshold of serum progesterone at presentation. The remaining PUL were triaged using a novel logistic regression risk model based on hCG ratio and initial serum progesterone (second step), defining low risk as an estimated EP risk of < 5%.

RESULTS

On validation, initial serum progesterone ≤ 2 nmol/L (step 1) classified 16.1% PUL as low risk. Second-step classification with the risk model selected an additional 46.0% of all PUL as low risk. Overall, the two-step protocol classified 62.1% of PUL as low risk, with an NPV of 98.6% and a sensitivity of 92.0%. When the risk model was used in isolation (i.e. without the first step), 60.5% of PUL were classified as low risk with 99.1% NPV and 94.9% sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

PUL can be classified efficiently into being either high or low risk for complications using a two-step protocol involving initial progesterone and hCG levels and the hCG ratio. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The clinical performance of the M4 decision support model to triage women with a pregnancy of unknown location as at low or high risk of complications

STUDY QUESTION

What are the adverse outcomes associated with using the M4 model in everyday clinical practice for women with pregnancy of unknown location (PUL)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

There were 17/835 (2.0%) adverse events and no serious adverse events associated with the performance of the M4 model in clinical practice.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The M4 model has previously been shown to stratify women classified as a PUL as at low or high risk of complications with a good level of test performance. The triage performance of the M4 model is better than single measurements of serum progesterone or the hCG ratio (serum hCG at 48 h/hCG at presentation).

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A prospective multi-centre cohort study of 1022 women with a PUL carried out between August 2012 and December 2013 across 2 university teaching hospitals and 1 district general hospital.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All women presenting with a PUL to the early pregnancy units of the three hospitals were recruited. The final outcome for PUL was either a failed PUL (FPUL), intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) or ectopic pregnancy (EP) (including persistent PUL (PPUL)), with EP and PPUL considered high-risk PUL. Their hCG results at 0 and 48 h were entered into the M4 model algorithm. If the risk of EP was ≥5%, the PUL was predicted to be high-risk and the participant was asked to re-attend 48 h later for a repeat hCG and transvaginal ultrasound scan by a senior clinician. If the PUL was classified as 'low risk, likely failed PUL', the participant was asked to perform a urinary pregnancy test 2 weeks later. If the PUL was classified as 'low risk, likely intrauterine', the participant was scheduled for a repeat scan in 1 week. Deviations from the management protocol were recorded as either an 'unscheduled visit (participant reason)', 'unscheduled visit (clinician reason)' or 'differences in timing (blood test/ultrasound)'. Adverse events were assessed using definitions outlined in the UK Good Clinical Practice Guidelines' document.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 835 (82%) women classified as a PUL were managed according to the M4 model (9 met the exclusion criteria, 69 were lost to follow-up, 109 had no hCG result at 48 h). Of these, 443 (53%) had a final outcome of FPUL, 298 (36%) an IUP and 94 (11%) an EP. The M4 model predicted 70% (585/835) PUL as low risk, of which 568 (97%) were confirmed as FPUL or IUP. Of the 17 EP and PPUL misclassified as low risk, 5 had expectant management, 7 medical management with methotrexate and 5 surgical intervention.Nineteen PUL had an unscheduled visit (participant reason), 38 PUL had an unscheduled visit (clinician reason) and 68 PUL had deviations from protocol due to a difference in timing (blood test/ultrasound).Adverse events were reported in 26 PUL and 1 participant had a serious adverse event. A total of 17/26 (65%) adverse events were misclassifications of a high risk PUL as low risk by the M4 model, while 5/26 (19%) adverse events were related to incorrect clinical decisions. Four of the 26 adverse events (15%) were secondary to unscheduled admissions for pain/bleeding. The serious adverse event was due to an incorrect clinical decision.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

A limitation of the study was that 69/1022 (7%) of PUL were lost to follow-up. A 48 h hCG level was missing for 109/1022 (11%) participants.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The low number of adverse events (2.0%) suggests that expectant management of PUL using the M4 prediction model is safe. The model is an effective way of triaging women with a PUL as being at high- and low-risk of complications and rationalizing follow-up. The multi-centre design of the study is more likely to make the performance of the M4 model generalizable in other populations.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

None.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

Incidence, diagnosis and management of tubal and nontubal ectopic pregnancies: a review

BACKGROUND

Ectopic pregnancy is a potentially life-threatening condition occurring in 1-2 % of all pregnancies. The most common ectopic implantation site is the fallopian tube, though 10 % of ectopic pregnancies implant in the cervix, ovary, myometrium, interstitial portion of the fallopian tube, abdominal cavity or within a cesarean section scar.

FINDINGS

Diagnosis involves a combination of clinical symptoms, serology, and ultrasound. Medical management is a safe and effective option in most clinically stable patients. Patients who have failed medical management, are ineligible, or present with ruptured ectopic pregnancy or heterotopic pregnancy are most often managed with excision by laparoscopy or, less commonly, laparotomy. Management of nontubal ectopic pregnancies may involve medical or surgical treatment, or a combination, as dictated by ectopic pregnancy location and the patient's clinical stability. Following tubal ectopic pregnancy, the rate of subsequent intrauterine pregnancy is high and independent of treatment modality.

CONCLUSION

This review describes the incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, and management of tubal and non-tubal ectopic and heterotopic pregnancies, and reviews the existing data regarding recurrence and future fertility.

Ectopic pregnancy secondary to in vitro fertilisation-embryo transfer: pathogenic mechanisms and management strategies

BACKGROUND

Ectopic pregnancy (EP) is the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality during the first trimester and the incidence increases dramatically with in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). The co-existence of an EP with a viable intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) is known as heterotopic pregnancy (HP) affecting about 1% of patients during assisted conception. EP/HP can cause significant morbidity and occasional mortality and represent diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, particularly during fertility treatment. Many risk factors related to IVF-ET techniques and the cause of infertility have been documented. The combination of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) is the most reliable diagnostic tool, with early diagnosis of EP/HP permitting conservative management. This review describes the risk factors, diagnostic modalities and treatment approaches of EP/HP during IVF-ET and also their impact on subsequent fertility treatment.

METHODS

The scientific literature was searched for studies investigating EP/HP during IVF-ET. Publications in English and within the past 6 years were mostly selected.

RESULTS

A history of tubal infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and specific aspects of embryo transfer technique are the most significant risk factors for later EP. Early measurement of serum hCG and performance of TVS by an expert operator as early as gestational week 5 can identify cases of possible EP. These women should be closely monitored with repeated ultrasound and hCG measurement until a diagnosis is reached. Treatment must be customised to the clinical condition and future fertility requirements of the patient. In cases of HP, the viable IUP can be preserved in the majority of cases but requires early detection of HP. No apparent negative impact of the different treatment approaches for EP/HP on subsequent IVF-ET, except for risk of recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

EP/HP are tragic events in a couple's reproductive life, and the earlier the diagnosis the better the prognosis. Due to the increase incidence following IVF-ET, there is a compelling need to develop a diagnostic biomarker/algorithm that can predict pregnancy outcome with high sensitivity and specificity before IVF-ET to prevent and/or properly manage those who are at higher risk of EP/HP.