A casemix cost comparison of 2 treatments for ectopic pregnancy

Treatment cost evaluation of extrauterine gravidity: a literature review of medical and surgical treatment costs

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of extrauterine pregnancy is possible very early giving the patient and doctors treatment options. As the risks and success rate of medical and surgical treatment are similar, the decision is increasingly influenced by cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

The following article systematically reviews the known literature regarding cost, decision criteria and possible follow-up.

METHODS

Literature review of extrauterine gravity in combination with cost in the online National Library of Medicine since 1.1.1997 following the PRISMA recommendations.

RESULTS

Six articles were identified in which the cost of the laparoscopic versus medical treatment is reviewed. In five articles, the medical treatment was shown to be more cost effective and in the sixth article the costs were found to be equal. The cost saving varies between 18 and 88% depending on the consideration of direct and indirect costs. If indirect expenses are considered, the total sum increases with treatment failures. Failure rates are given as up to 27% depending on the type of failure (surgical or medical). These rates seem to be linked indirectly with the β-HCG levels. Predictive parameters for the successful medical treatment are missing.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of small extrauterine gravidities in haemodynamically stable patients (defined by HCG levels <1,500 IU/l) is medically successful and cost-effective. With HCG levels between 1,500 IU/l and 3,000 IU/l, the treatment costs are similar. HCG levels >5,000 IU/l favour the surgical treatment as being more cost-effective. A similar cut-off for the sonographic imaging is missing.

The clinical presentation, treatment, and outcome of patients diagnosed with possible ectopic molar gestation

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical presentation, treatment, and outcome of patients diagnosed with possible ectopic molar gestation registered with the Trophoblastic Disease Screening and Treatment Centre, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield between 1986 and 2000. From the 5581 women registered, those with a diagnosis of ectopic molar pregnancy were identified from a computer database. Information regarding the relevant history of each patient and the clinical presentation, treatment, and outcomes of gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD) was determined by reviewing referral forms, case notes, and pro formas completed by the referring gynecologist. Histological review of the cases was undertaken where possible. Suspected ectopic molar gestations comprised 31/5581 (0.55%) of registrations. Known risk factors for ectopic pregnancy were identified in 79% of cases. Central histological review confirmed only six cases of GTD: three choriocarcinoma and three early complete moles. Four patients subsequently required chemotherapy. All patients are now in complete remission. We conclude that ectopic GTD is uncommon, with a UK incidence of approximately 1.5 per 1,000,000 births. Initial management is usually surgical removal of the conceptus, pathological suspicion of the diagnosis and registration with a screening center. Chemotherapy may be required and the prognosis is excellent.