The impact of COVID-19 on the assessment and management of ectopic pregnancies.

Lay Summary: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the public delayed seeking medical help, which may have affected the impact of having an ectopic pregnancy. An ectopic pregnancy is when pregnancy tissue grows outside its normal position in the womb, and it can be life-threatening. It can be treated by non-surgical or surgical options, and any delay in seeking help can reduce the options for treatment and increase the need for more urgent management. We wanted to assess whether there were differences in the presentation and management of ectopic pregnancies in a major teaching hospital between 2019 (pre-COVID-19) and 2021 (COVID-19 period). We found that the pandemic did not cause a delay in seeking medical help or cause worse outcomes. In fact, immediate surgical treatment and time in the hospital were less during COVID-19, perhaps because of a desire to avoid admission to hospital. One outcome of COVID-19 is reassurance that we can safely use more non-surgical treatments for ectopic pregnancies.

To Fight or to Flee? A Systematic Review of Ectopic Pregnancy Management and Complications During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND/AIM: During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns regarding theoretical risks of surgery contributed to changes in clinical management to prevent contamination. We looked at the effect the pandemic had on the management of ectopic pregnancy. Our review compares published data on pre-COVID to COVID management of ectopic pregnancies and evaluates the differences where Early Pregnancy Unit (EPU) structures exist. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the published evidence using a keyword strategy. The "Population Intervention Comparison and Outcome" (PICO) criteria were used to select studies. Three independent reviewers agreed on the data extracted after screening of the literature. The total population analysed included 3122 women. A meta-analysis of the included studies was completed using a random or fixed effect model depending on the heterogeneity (I2). Our outcomes were the following: type of management of ectopic pregnancy (EP), incidence of ruptured EP and rate of complications. We compared units with and without EPU infrastructure. RESULTS: We included every study which recruited women diagnosed with ectopic pregnancy and compared the type of management during and prior the COVID-19 peak. Our literature search yielded 34 papers. 12 were included using the PRISMA guidelines. We observed no difference in the type of management (surgical versus non-surgical) [OR=0.99 (0.63-1.55), p=0.96, I2=77%] in the pre-Covid vs. Covid cohorts overall but a reduction of surgical management in EPU structures. There was no difference in the ectopic rupture rate within the EPU branch [OR=0.66 (0.33-1.31), p=0.24, I2=37%]. In contrast, in non-EPU (NPEU) structures there was a clear increased risk of ruptured ectopic pregnancy [OR=2.86 (1.84-4.46), p<0.01 I2=13%] and complications [OR=1.69 (1.23-2.31), p=0.001, I2=45%]. CONCLUSION: The risk of ruptured ectopic and complications was significantly higher in the absence of EPU structures. This worldwide trend was not reflected in the UK, where EPU systems are widespread, suggesting that EPU structures contributed to prompt diagnosis and safe management. In the post-COVID era, healthcare systems have come to realise that pandemics might become the norm and thus the onus is to identify services that have worked seamlessly.

Utility of a routine ultrasound for detection of ectopic pregnancies among women requesting abortion: a retrospective review.

INTRODUCTION: Routine ultrasound may be used in abortion services to determine gestational age and confirm an intrauterine pregnancy. However, ultrasound adds complexity to care and results may be inconclusive, delaying abortion. We sought to determine the rate of ectopic pregnancy and the utility of routine ultrasound in its detection, in a community abortion service. METHODS: Retrospective case record review of women requesting abortion over a 5-year period (2015-2019) with an outcome of ectopic pregnancy or pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) at a service (Edinburgh, UK) conducting routine ultrasound on all women. Records were searched for symptoms at presentation, development of symptoms during clinical care, significant risk factors and routine ultrasound findings. RESULTS: Only 29/11 381 women (0.25%, 95% CI 0.18%, 0.33%) had an ectopic pregnancy or PUL (tubal=18, caesarean scar=1, heterotopic=1, PUL=9). Eleven (38%) cases had either symptoms at presentation (n=8) and/or significant risk factors for ectopic pregnancy (n=4). A further 12 women developed symptoms during their clinical care. Of the remaining six, three were PUL treated with methotrexate and three were ectopic (salpingectomy=2, methotrexate=1). In three cases, the baseline ultrasound indicated a probable early intrauterine pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Ectopic pregnancies are uncommon among women presenting for abortion. The value of routine ultrasound in excluding ectopic pregnancy in symptom-free women without significant risk factors is questionable as it may aid detection of some cases but may provide false reassurance that a pregnancy is intrauterine.

Ultrasound characteristics, serum biochemistry and outcome of ectopic pregnancies presenting during COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the characteristics of ectopic pregnancies (EPs) in the year prior to vs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of women diagnosed with an EP on transvaginal sonography conducted at a center in London, UK, providing early-pregnancy assessment, between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2020. Women were identified via the Astraia ultrasound reporting system using coded and non-coded outcomes of EP or pregnancy outside the uterine cavity. Data related to predefined outcomes were collected using Astraia and Cerner electronic reporting systems. Main outcome measures included clinical, ultrasound and biochemical features of EP, in addition to reported complications and management. RESULTS: There were 22 683 consultations over the 2-year period. Following consultation, a similar number and proportion of EPs were diagnosed in 2019 (141/12 657 (1%)) and 2020 (134/10 026 (1%)). Both cohorts were comparable in age, ethnicity, weight and method of conception. Gestational age at the first transvaginal sonography scan and at diagnosis were similar, and no difference in location, size or morphology of EP was found between the two cohorts. Serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) levels at the time of EP diagnosis were higher in 2020 than in 2019 (1005 IU/L vs 665 IU/L; P = 0.03). The proportions of women according to type of final EP management were similar, but the rate of failed first-line management was higher during vs before the pandemic (16% vs 6%; P = 0.01). The rates of blood detected in the pelvis (hemoperitoneum) on ultrasound (23% vs 26%; P = 0.58) and of ruptured EP confirmed surgically (9% vs 3%; P = 0.07) were similar in 2019 vs 2020. CONCLUSIONS: No difference was observed in the location, size, morphology or gestational age at the first ultrasound examination or at diagnosis of EP between women diagnosed before vs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Complication rates and final management strategy were also unchanged. However, hCG levels and the failure rate of first-line conservative management measures were higher during the pandemic. Our findings suggest that women continued to access appropriate care for EP during the COVID-19 pandemic, with no evidence of diagnostic delay or an increase in adverse outcome in our population. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on ectopic pregnancy management in the United Kingdom: a multicentre observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the management of women with ectopic pregnancy. DESIGN: A multicentre observational study comparing outcomes from a prospective cohort during the pandemic [COVID-19-ectopic pregnancy registry (CEPR)] compared with a historical pre-pandemic cohort [non-COVID-19-ectopic pregnancy registry (NCEPR)]. SETTING: Five London university hospitals. POPULATION AND METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed clinically and/or radiologically with ectopic pregnancy (March 2020-August 2020) were entered into the CEPR and results were compared with the NCEPR cohort (January 2019-June 2019). An adjusted analysis was performed for potentially confounding variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient demographics, management (expectant, medical and surgical), length of treatment, number of hospital visits (non-surgical management), length of stay (surgical management) and 30-day complications. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-one women met the inclusion criteria: 162 CEPR and 179 NCEPR. A significantly lower percentage of women underwent surgical management versus non-surgical management in the CEPR versus NCEPR (58.6%; 95/162 versus 72.6%; 130/179; P = 0.007). Among patients managed with expectant management, the CEPR had a significantly lower mean number of hospital visits compared with NCEPR (3.0, interquartile range [IQR] [3, 5] versus 9.0, [5, 14]; P = <0.001). Among patients managed with medical management, the CEPR had a significantly lower median number of hospital visits versus NCEPR (6.0, [5, 8] versus 9, [6, 10]; P = 0.003). There was no observed difference in complication rates between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Women were found to undergo significantly higher rates of non-surgical management during the COVID-19 first wave compared with a pre-pandemic cohort. Women managed non-surgically in the CPER cohort were also managed with fewer hospital attendances. This did not lead to an increase in observed complication rates. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: A higher rate of non-surgical management of ectopic pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase complication rates.

A population-based analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on common abdominal and gynecological emergency department visits.

BACKGROUND: Reduced use of the emergency department during the COVID-19 pandemic may result in increased disease acuity when patients do seek health care services. We sought to evaluate emergency department visits for common abdominal and gynecologic conditions before and at the beginning of the pandemic to determine whether changes in emergency department attendance had serious consequences for patients. METHODS: We conducted a population-based analysis using administrative data to evaluate the weekly rate of emergency department visits pre-COVID-19 (Jan. 1-Mar. 10, 2020) and during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (Mar. 11-June 30, 2020), compared with a historical control period (Jan. 1-July 1, 2019). All residents of Ontario, Canada, presenting to the emergency department with appendicitis, cholecystitis, ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage were included. We evaluated weekly incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of emergency department visits, management strategies and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Across all study periods, 39 691 emergency department visits met inclusion criteria (40.2 % appendicitis, 32.1% miscarriage, 21.3% cholecystitis, 6.4% ectopic pregnancy). Baseline characteristics of patients presenting to the emergency department did not vary across study periods. After an initial reduction in emergency department visits, presentations for cholecystitis and ectopic pregnancy quickly returned to expected levels. However, presentations for appendicitis and miscarriage showed sustained reductions (IRR 0.61-0.80), with 1087 and 984 fewer visits, respectively, after the start of the pandemic, relative to 2019. Management strategies, complications and mortality rates were similar across study periods for all conditions. INTERPRETATION: Although our study showed evidence of emergency department avoidance in Ontario during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, no adverse consequences were evident. Emergency care and outcomes for patients were similar before and during the pandemic.

Delayed presentation of ectopic pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study of a collateral effect.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the rates of overall diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy (EP), treatment modality and associated complications during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the exact time period in the previous year (pre-COVID-19). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single referral regional center (Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel). Prevalence of the diagnosis of EP, treatment modality and associated complications during the COVID-19 lockdown period in the state of Israel (March 10-May 12, 2020) was compared to patients receiving the same diagnosis during the parallel timeframe in the previous year (2019). RESULTS: Overall there were 29 and 43 cases of EP during the COVID-19 and pre COVID-19 epoch, respectively. COVID-19 period patients presented to the emergency room with significantly higher ß-human chorionic gonadotrophin level; median of 1364 versus 633 IU, P = 0.001. The rate of ruptured EP was; 20.7% versus 4.3% P = 0.031, and surgical approach; 55.2% versus 27.9%, P = 0.001. Significantly higher median volume of blood loss; median volume 852 versus 300 ml, P = 0.042 were observed in patients during the COVID-19 epoch. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to delayed presentation of patients with EP, and the requirement of subsequent emergency surgical management and excessive blood loss. Special attention should be given to the decline in routine medical care during the pandemic.

Maternal health care management during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a novel type of highly contagious pneumonia caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite the strong efforts taken to control the epidemic, hundreds of thousands of people were infected worldwide by 11 March, and the situation was characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization. Pregnant women are more susceptible to viral infection due to immune and anatomic alteration, though hospital visits may increase the chance of infection, the lack of medical care during pregnancy may do more harm. Hence, a well-managed system that allows pregnant women to access maternal health care with minimum exposure risk is desired during the outbreak. Here, we present the managing processes of three pregnant women who had fever during hospitalization in the gynecology or obstetrics department, and then, we further summarize and demonstrate our maternal health care management strategies including antenatal care planning, patient triage based on the risk level, admission control, and measures counteracting emergencies and newly discovered high-risk cases at in-patient department. In the meantime, we will explain the alterations we have done throughout different stages of the epidemic and also review relative articles in both Chinese and English to compare our strategies with those of other areas. Although tens of COVID-19 cases were confirmed in our hospital, no nosocomial infection has occurred and none of the pregnant women registered in our hospital was reported to be infected.