Management and outcome of heterotopic interstitial pregnancy: Case report and review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of heterotopic interstitial pregnancy after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET), presenting with a second trimester uterine rupture. To review the clinical presentations, risk factors, treatment options, and outcome of heterotopic interstitial pregnancies. METHODS: We describe the clinical presentation, management, and outcome of a patient with a heterotopic interstitial pregnancy, diagnosed following second trimester rupture of the interstitial pregnancy. We reviewed all published cases of heterotopic interstitial pregnancies. RESULTS: A 35-year-old pregnant woman with a past history of right adnexectomy and 16 weeks pregnant with dichorionic diamniotic twins following IVF-ET, was admitted to our department with unexplained recurrent abdominal pain and anemia. Further investigation showed a hemoperitoneum and because of hypovolemic shock an emergency laparotomy was performed, with diagnosis of a ruptured heterotopic interstitial pregnancy. The uterine defect was sutured using simple interrupted sutures. The intrauterine pregnancy progressed uneventful afterwards.We found 86 cases in the published literature, reporting on heterotopic interstitial pregnancies. 80.2% (69/86) occurred after IVF-ET. History of uni- or bilateral salpingectomy is a major risk factor, present in 39.5% (34/86). 37.2% (32/86) presented with cornual rupture. Surgery was performed in 53.5% (46/86) of cases. Medical management was possible in case of unruptured, early diagnosed heterotopic interstitial pregnancy (32.6% (28/86)). Watchful waiting was only possible when the interstitial pregnancy miscarried (5.8% (5/86)). The live birth rate of the intrauterine pregnancy, when viable at presentation, was 70.0% (56/80). The live birth rate of the interstitial pregnancy was only 4.7% (4/86). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of cases are diagnosed by detailed ultrasound in the setting of early follow-up after IVF-ET and are asymptomatic at diagnosis. Yet, a substantial number of patients present with cornual rupture. Risk factors are IVF-ET and a history of salpingectomy. Depending on clinical presentation, treatment options include watchful waiting, medical treatment, or surgery. Unfortunately, the interstitial pregnancy is generally lost, and only has a chance of survival in case of presentation at a viable gestational age. The outcome of the coexisting intrauterine pregnancy is generally good.

Hysteroscopy in recurrent in-vitro fertilisation failure (TROPHY): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The success rate of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) remains low and many women undergo multiple treatment cycles. A previous meta-analysis suggested hysteroscopy could improve outcomes in women who have had recurrent implantation failure; however, studies were of poor quality and a definitive randomised trial was needed. In the TROPHY trial we aimed to assess whether hysteroscopy improves the livebirth rate following IVF treatment in women with recurrent failure of implantation. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in eight hospitals in the UK, Belgium, Italy, and the Czech Republic. We recruited women younger than 38 years who had normal ultrasound of the uterine cavity and history of two to four unsuccessful IVF cycles. We used an independent web-based trial management system to randomly assign (1:1) women to receive outpatient hysteroscopy (hysteroscopy group) or no hysteroscopy (control group) in the month before starting a treatment cycle of IVF (with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection). A computer-based algorithm minimised for key prognostic variables: age, body-mass index, basal follicle-stimulating hormone concentration, and the number of previous failed IVF cycles. The order of group assignment was masked to the researchers at the time of recruitment and randomisation. Embryologists involved in the embryo transfer were masked to group allocation, but physicians doing the procedure knew of group assignment and had hysteroscopy findings accessible. Participants were not masked to their group assignment. The primary outcome was the livebirth rate (proportion of women who had a live baby beyond 24 weeks of gestation) in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN35859078. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2013, we randomly assigned 350 women to the hysteroscopy group and 352 women to the control group. 102 (29%) of women in the hysteroscopy group had a livebirth after IVF compared with 102 (29%) women in the control group (risk ratio 1·0, 95% CI 0·79-1·25; p=0·96). No hysteroscopy-related adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Outpatient hysteroscopy before IVF in women with a normal ultrasound of the uterine cavity and a history of unsuccessful IVF treatment cycles does not improve the livebirth rate. Further research into the effectiveness of surgical correction of specific uterine cavity abnormalities before IVF is warranted. FUNDING: European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy.

Prospective multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of office diagnostic hysteroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic hysteroscopy is not widely performed in the office setting, one of the reasons being the discomfort produced by the procedure. This randomized controlled trial was performed to evaluate the effects of instrument diameter, patient parity and surgeon experience on the pain suffered and success rate of the procedure. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo office diagnostic hysteroscopy either with 5.0 mm conventional instruments (n=240) or with 3.5 mm mini-instruments (n=240). Procedures were stratified according to patient parity and surgeon's previous experience. The pain experienced during the procedure (0-10), the quality of visualization of the uterine cavity (0-3) and the complications were recorded. The examination was considered successful when the pain score was <4, visualization score was >1 and no complication occurred. RESULTS: Less pain, better visualization and higher success rates were observed with mini-hysteroscopy (P <0.0001, P <0.0001 and P <0.0001, respectively), in patients with vaginal deliveries (P <0.0001, P <0.0001 and P <0.0001, respectively) and in procedures performed by experienced surgeons (P=0.02, P=NS and P=NS, respectively). The effects of patient parity and surgeon experience were no longer important when mini-hysteroscopy was used. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate the advantages of mini-hysteroscopy and the importance of patient parity and surgeon experience, suggesting that mini-hysteroscopy should always be used, especially for inexperienced surgeons and when difficult access to the uterine cavity is anticipated. They indicate that mini-hysteroscopy can be offered as a first line office diagnostic procedure.