ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Distinguishing tubal rupture from tubal abortion in ectopic pregnancies after methotrexate treatment: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methotrexate in relatively contraindicated ectopic pregnancies: who benefits from treatment?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Ovarian pregnancy: clinical characteristics, diagnostic challenges, and sonographic features-a multicenter case series with narrative literature overview.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify clinical, sonographic, and laboratory characteristics that distinguish between tubal rupture and tubal abortion following methotrexate (MTX) treatment for ectopic pregnancy (EP) and to compare the morbidity associated with these 2 outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included women treated with MTX for EP at Galilee Medical Center between 2012 and 2024. Data on clinical presentation, ultrasound findings, and laboratory values were analyzed. Uregint surgical interventions were classified as tubal rupture or tubal abortion based on intraoperative findings. A comparative analysis between these groups was performed, and multivariable modeling was used to identify predictors of tubal rupture.
resultsAmong 280 women treated with MTX, 47 (16.7%) required urgent surgical intervention. Of these, 15 (34.9%) were confirmed as tubal rupture, while 28 (65.1%) were tubal abortion. Women with tubal rupture more frequently presented with free pelvic fluid on transvaginal ultrasound (64.3 vs. 28.6%, P = 0.045) and had significantly higher intraoperative blood loss (433 ± 143 mL vs. 250 ± 201 mL, P = 0.001). A multivariable logistic regression model identified free pelvic fluid as an independent predictor of tubal rupture (odds ratio: 6.09, 95% CI 1.23-30.09, P = 0.027). No significant differences in preoperative beta-hCG levels or other clinical symptoms were observed between the groups.
conclusionTubal rupture and tubal abortion share overlapping clinical features, making differentiation with current diagnostic tools challenging. Free pelvic fluid on ultrasound is a significant indicator of tubal rupture, underscoring the importance of timely surgical intervention. Recognizing that tubal abortion may be a self-limiting condition in some cases offers opportunities to preserve fallopian tube integrity and reduce unnecessary surgeries. Further research is needed to improve diagnostic accuracy and explore conservative management strategies for tubal abortion. Date and number of trial registration: December 2024, 0138-24-NHR.
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.