Literature DB >> 30243810

Optimal treatment for women with a persisting pregnancy of unknown location, a randomized controlled trial: The ACT-or-NOT trial.

Kurt T Barnhart1, Mary D Sammel2, Mary Stephenson3, Jared Robins4, Karl R Hansen5, Wahid A Youssef6, Nanette Santoro7, Esther Eisenberg8, Heping Zhang9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) is not a diagnosis but a transient state used to classify a woman when she has a positive pregnancy test without definitive evidence of an intra-uterine or extra-uterine pregnancy on transvaginal ultrasonography. Management of a persisting PUL varies substantially, including expectant or active management. Active management can include uterine cavity evacuation or systemic administration of methotrexate. To date, no consensus has been reached on whether either management strategy is superior or non-inferior to the other.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Academic medical centers. PATIENTS: We plan to randomize 276 persisting PUL-diagnosed women who are 18 years or older from Reproductive Medicine Network clinics and additional interested sites, all patients will be followed for 2 years for fertility and patient satisfaction outcomes.
INTERVENTIONS: Randomization will be 1:1:1 ratio between expectant management, uterine evacuation and empiric use of methotrexate. After randomization to initial management plan, all patients will be followed by their clinicians until resolution of the PUL. The clinician will determine whether there is a change in management, based on clinical symptoms, and/or serial human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) concentrations and/or additional ultrasonography. MAIN OUTCOME: The primary outcome measure in each of the 3 treatment arms is the uneventful clinical resolution of a persistent PUL without change from the initial management strategy. Secondary outcome measures include: number of ruptured ectopic pregnancies, number and type of re-interventions (additional methotrexate injections or surgical procedures), treatment complications, adverse events, number of visits, time to resolution, patient satisfaction, and future fertility.
CONCLUSION: This multicenter randomized controlled trial will provide guidance for evidence-based management for women who have persisting pregnancy of unknown location.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomarkers; Ectopic Pregnancy; Methotrexate; PUL; Uterine Evacuation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30243810      PMCID: PMC6231403          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.09.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  18 in total

1.  Trends in the diagnosis and treatment of ectopic pregnancy in the United States.

Authors:  Karen W Hoover; Guoyu Tao; Charlotte K Kent
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 2.  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 3.  Clinical practice. Ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  Kurt T Barnhart
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Expectant management of early pregnancies of unknown location: a prospective evaluation of methods to predict spontaneous resolution of pregnancy.

Authors:  S Banerjee; N Aslam; B Woelfer; A Lawrence; J Elson; D Jurkovic
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.531

Review 5.  Epidemiology of ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  W H Chow; J R Daling; W Cates; R S Greenberg
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 6.222

6.  Use of "2-dose" regimen of methotrexate to treat ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  Kurt Barnhart; Amy C Hummel; Mary D Sammel; Seema Menon; John Jain; Nahida Chakhtoura
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2006-11-13       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Expectant management of tubal ectopic pregnancy: prediction of successful outcome using decision tree analysis.

Authors:  J Elson; A Tailor; S Banerjee; R Salim; K Hillaby; D Jurkovic
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 7.299

8.  Exploring the Subtleties of Inverse Probability Weighting and Marginal Structural Models.

Authors:  Alexander Breskin; Stephen R Cole; Daniel Westreich
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 4.822

Review 9.  Early pregnancy failure: beware of the pitfalls of modern management.

Authors:  Kurt T Barnhart
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  The METEX study: methotrexate versus expectant management in women with ectopic pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Norah M van Mello; Femke Mol; Albert H Adriaanse; Erik A Boss; Antonius B Dijkman; Johannes Pr Doornbos; Mark Hans Emanuel; Jaap Friederich; Loes van der Leeuw-Harmsen; Jos P Lips; Evert Jp van Santbrink; Harold R Verhoeve; Harry Visser; Willem M Ankum; Fulco van der Veen; Ben W Mol; Petra J Hajenius
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2008-06-19       Impact factor: 2.809

View more
  1 in total

1.  Effect of an Active vs Expectant Management Strategy on Successful Resolution of Pregnancy Among Patients With a Persisting Pregnancy of Unknown Location: The ACT or NOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Kurt T Barnhart; Karl R Hansen; Mary D Stephenson; Rebecca Usadi; Anne Z Steiner; Marcelle I Cedars; Emily S Jungheim; Kathleen M Hoeger; Stephen A Krawetz; Benjie Mills; Meredith Alston; Christos Coutifaris; Suneeta Senapati; Sarita Sonalkar; Michael P Diamond; Robert A Wild; Mitchell Rosen; Mary D Sammel; Nanette Santoro; Esther Eisenberg; Hao Huang; Heping Zhang
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 56.272

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.