Literature DB >> 10548636

Implementation of probabilistic decision rules improves the predictive values of algorithms in the diagnostic management of ectopic pregnancy.

B W Mol1, F van Der Veen, P M Bossuyt.   

Abstract

Current algorithms for the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy do not take into account the heterogeneity in patient profiles. Such heterogeneity can lead to differences in the pre-test probability of ectopic pregnancy. In patients with clinical symptoms, for example, the probability of presence of an ectopic pregnancy is higher than in symptom-free patients. Any additional tests should then be interpreted differently, depending on the pre-test probability. We present a diagnostic algorithm that uses probabilistic decision rules for the evaluation of women with suspected ectopic pregnancy with flexible cut-off levels for test positivity We compare it with a general algorithm that uses fixed cut-off levels. Fictitious cohorts, varying in prevalence of ectopic pregnancy were put together, using data obtained from a cohort of >800 women with suspected ectopic pregnancy. In the inflexible algorithm, ectopic pregnancy was diagnosed whenever it could be visualized at transvaginal sonography, or where serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) exceeded a rigid cut-off level; ectopic pregnancy was rejected if an intrauterine pregnancy was seen or when serum HCG decreased. In the flexible algorithm, a post-test probability was obtained after each test, using pre-test probabilities and test-based likelihood ratios. Ectopic pregnancy was diagnosed whenever the post-test probability for ectopic pregnancy exceeded 95%, whereas this diagnosis was rejected if the calculated post-test probability fell below 1%. For both algorithms, sensitivity and specificity as well as predictive values were calculated. At each prevalence, the inflexible algorithm was associated with a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 97%. In contrast, the sensitivity and specificity of the flexible, individualized algorithm depended on the prevalence of ectopic pregnancy. Consequently, predictive values varied strongly when the inflexible algorithm was used, whereas they were much more stable after using the flexible algorithm. For five possible valuations of false positive and false negative diagnoses, the flexible algorithm reduced the expected disutility, compared with the inflexible algorithm. It is concluded that clinicians should incorporate probabilistic decision rules in algorithms used for the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10548636     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.11.2855

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  10 in total

1.  Diagnosing suspected ectopic pregnancy. Hcg monitoring and transvaginal ultrasound lead the way.

Authors:  W M Ankum
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-11-18

2.  Commentary

Authors: 
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2000-10

Review 3.  Tubal ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  Rajesh Varma; Janesh Gupta
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2012-02-10

4.  Tubal ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  Vinod Kumar; Janesh Gupta
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2015-11-16

Review 5.  Interventions for tubal ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  P J Hajenius; F Mol; B W J Mol; P M M Bossuyt; W M Ankum; F van der Veen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-01-24

Review 6.  Tubal ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  Rajesh Varma; Janesh Gupta
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2009-04-20

7.  Ectopic pregnancy after infertility treatment.

Authors:  Madhuri Patil
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2012-05

8.  Ectopic pregnancy: when is expectant management safe?

Authors:  Sharon P Rodrigues; Kirsten J de Burlet; Ellen Hiemstra; Andries R H Twijnstra; Erik W van Zwet; Trudy C M Trimbos-Kemper; Frank W Jansen
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2012-03-06

9.  Triage using a self-assessment questionnaire to detect potentially life-threatening emergencies in gynecology.

Authors:  Cyrille Huchon; Alexandre Dumont; Anne Chantry; Bruno Falissard; Arnaud Fauconnier
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Operative hysteroscopy versus vacuum aspiration for incomplete spontaneous abortion (HY-PER): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Cyrille Huchon; Martin Koskas; Aubert Agostini; Cherif Akladios; Souhail Alouini; Estelle Bauville; Nicolas Bourdel; Hervé Fernandez; Xavier Fritel; Olivier Graesslin; Guillaume Legendre; Jean-Philippe Lucot; Isabelle Matheron; Pierre Panel; Cyril Raiffort; Arnaud Fauconnier
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 2.279

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.