Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Published:
Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology [Medical Sciences] Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Juneau C, Bates GW. Reproductive outcomes after medical and surgical management of ectopic pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2012,55(2):455–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosman ER, Keegan DA, Krey L, et al. Ectopic pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization: a look at the donor egg population. Fertil Steril, 2009,92(5):1791–1793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Milki AA, Jun SH. Ectopic pregnancy rates with day 3 versus day 5 embryo transfer: a retrospective analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2003,3(1):7

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Farquhar CM. Ectopic pregnancy. Lancet, 2005,366 (9485):583–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Malak M, Tawfeeq T, Holzer H, et al. Risk factors for ectopic pregnancy after in vitro fertilization treatment. J Obstet Gynaecol Can, 2011,33(6):617–619

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Casikar I, Reid S, Condous G. Ectopic pregnancy: Ultrasound diagnosis in modern management. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2012,55(2):402–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van Mello NM, Zietse CS, Mol F, 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Orji EO, Fasubaa OB, Adeyemi B, et al. Mortality and morbidity associated with misdiagnosis of ectopic pregnancy in a defined Nigerian population. J Obstet Gynaecol, 2002,22(5):548–550

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Seeber BE. What serial hCG can tell you, and cannot tell you, about an early pregnancy. Fertil Steril, 2012,98 (5):1074–1077

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kirk E, Condous G, Bourne T. Pregnancies of unknown location. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2009, 23(4):493–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Clayton HB, Schieve LA, Peterson HB, 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosner F. Patient noncompliance: causes and solutions. Mt Sinai J Med, 2006,73(2):553–559

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Baron KT, Babagbemi KT, Arleo EK, et al. Emergent complications of assisted reproduction: expecting the unexpected. Radiographics, 2013,33(1):229–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gibson KR, Horne AW. Ruptured heterotopic pregnancy: an unusual presentation of an uncommon clinical problem. BMJ Case Rep, 2012, [PMID: 23192579]

    Google Scholar 

  16. Seeber BE, Sammel MD, Guo W, 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Barnhart KT. Clinical practice. Ectopic pregnancy. N Engl J Med, 2009,361(4):379–387

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Carazo HB, Perez-Ezquerra BR, Sanz LA, et al. Uterine rupture of a cornual pregnancy: an obstetric emergency. Ginecol Obstet Mex, 2012,80(7):491–494

    Google Scholar 

  19. Seshadri S, Shirley P, Jaiganesh T, 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, [PMID: 22736389]

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, De Leon L, et al. Frozen- thawed embryo transfer is associated with a significantly reduced incidence of ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril, 2012,98(6):1490–1494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ishihara O, Kuwahara A, Saitoh H. Frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer reduces ectopic pregnancy risk: an analysis of single embryo transfer cycles in Japan. Fertil Steril, 2011,95(6):1966–1969

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shi-ling Chen  (陈士岭).

Additional information

Both authors contributed equally to this work.

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81170574), the National Key Basic Research Development Plan of China (973 Program) (No. 2007CB948104), Key Science and Technology Projects of Guangzhou (No. 11C22120737) and Comprehensive Strategic Sciences Cooperation Projects of Guangdong Province and Chinese Academy (No. 04020416).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, Ll., Chen, X., Ye, Ds. et al. Misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis for ectopic and heterotopic pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J. Huazhong Univ. Sci. Technol. [Med. Sci.] 34, 103–107 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-014-1239-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-014-1239-7

Key words

Navigation