ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Is It Possible to Diagnose Preoperatively a Tubal Ectopic Hydatidiform Molar Pregnancy? Description of a Case Report and Review of the Literature of the Last Ten Years.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isthmic tubal ectopic pregnancy from a partial molar pregnancy: A case report and literature review.Case reports in women's health · 2025Article
- Tubal ectopic molar pregnancy: A case report.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2024Article
- A Case of Fallopian Tubal Mole Laparoscopically Treated before Tubal Rupture and a 5-year Literature Review.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
synopsisNowadays there are no clinical, laboratory, or ultrasound criteria to differentiate ectopic tubal pregnancy from tubal molar pregnancy, so a preoperative diagnosis is not possible.
objectiveTubal ectopic hydatidiform moles are a rare type of gestational trophoblastic disease. The aim of our work is to understand if it is possible to diagnose, preoperatively, a tubal ectopic molar pregnancy, starting from the evaluation of a complicated case report up to performing a review of the literature. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 27-year-old woman was referred to our department for right pelvic pain, vaginal bleeding, and positive beta-hCG (590 mUI/mL). At the ultrasound, the uterine cavity was empty and a unilocular cyst of 15 mm below the right ovary, suspicious of ectopic pregnancy, was described. Serial measurements of daily beta-hCG (2031 → 2573 → 3480 mUI/mL) and, after five days, a laparoscopic salpingectomy, were performed. The pathologist confirmed a diagnosis of "incomplete invasive vesicular mole with extrauterine implant". A review of the literature was performed, following the PRISMA statement, and searching all the articles related to this topic in the last ten years from PUBMED. We obtained data from thirteen studies, describing fourteen cases. DISCUSSION: Considering the data from the literature, the main clinical symptoms were pelvic pain (100%), vaginal bleeding (64%), vomiting (7%), and fever (7%). By ultrasound examination, left adnexal mass on ten women (72%), and right adnexal mass on four (28%), were described. An assessment of ectopic pregnancy was made in all cases, but no preoperative diagnosis of tubal molar pregnancy was made. Beta-hCG levels were the same as patients with ectopic tubal pregnancy.
conclusionNowadays there are no clinical, laboratory, or ultrasound criteria to differentiate ectopic tubal pregnancy from tubal molar pregnancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.