背景:输卵管异位妊娠(EP)是一种危及生命的疾病,特别是如果未诊断或误诊,在低收入国家和/或妇女获得医疗保健的机会有限。目前输卵管EP的管理方案包括手术管理,或甲氨蝶呤的医疗管理。最近的研究,虽然很少,建议来曲唑,芳香化酶抑制剂,可能在输卵管EP的药物治疗中发挥作用。
目的:评价来曲唑单药治疗输卵管EP的有效性。
方法:检索电子数据库直至2023年12月31日。
方法:报告单独使用来曲唑治疗输卵管EP的回顾性或前瞻性研究被认为符合纳入标准。
方法:合并结果表示为与95CI的OR。使用HigginsI2评估异质性。根据干预后的时间进行亚组分析以比较结果。通过χ2检验检查亚组差异。
结果:共纳入152例患者。79例患者(51.97%)接受来曲唑治疗,39例(16.54%)甲氨蝶呤,34例(31.49%)接受手术治疗。汇总的数据分析支持来曲唑在减少β-hCG的效果的一致性,随着时间的推移,在研究中具有可比性。来曲唑治疗优于手术,疗效与甲氨蝶呤相同。然而,根据研究设计,所有纳入的研究都被认为存在高偏倚风险,样本代表性,和采样技术。此外,纳入的任何研究均未报告短期和长期副作用.
结论:来曲唑是治疗输卵管EP的一种有希望的替代甲氨蝶呤和手术治疗的方法。尽管这项荟萃分析表明该药物的有效性和低风险,并鼓励其应用,今天可用的数据仍然非常稀疏,削弱了任何可以提出的主张,并且不足以断言来曲唑在EP的治疗中是安全有效的。绝对需要准确选择患者的随机研究,固定剂量,大样本量,并报告短期和长期副作用以反驳或证实这一假设。
BACKGROUND: Tubal ectopic pregnancy (EP) is a life-threatening condition, especially if undiagnosed or misdiagnosed, tipically in low income countries and/or where women have limited access to health care. The current management protocol of tubal EP consists of either surgical management, or medical management with methotrexate. Recent studies, while few, have suggested that letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, may play a role in the medical treatment of tubal EP.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of letrozole alone in the medical treatment of tubal EP.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched until 31 December 2023.
METHODS: Retrospective or prospective studies reporting the treatment of tubal EP with letrozole alone were considered eligible for inclusion.
METHODS: Pooled results were expressed as OR with 95 %CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using Higgins I2. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare outcomes according to time after intervention. Subgroup differences were checked through χ2 test.
RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were included. Seventy-nine patients (51.97 %) were treated with letrozole, 39 patients (16.54 %) with methotrexate, and 34 patients (31.49 %) underwent surgical treatment. Pooled data analysis supports the consistency of the effect of letrozole in reducing β-hCG over time at a comparable rate among studies, and that treatment with letrozole is superior to surgery and has the same efficacy as methotrexate. However, all the included studies were judged at high risk of bias in terms of study design, sample representativeness, and sampling technique. Furthermore, short and long term side effects were not reported in any of the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Letrozole is a promising alternative to methotrexate and surgical therapy in the treatment of tubal EP. Although this meta-analysis suggests efficacy and low hazard of the drug and encourages its application, the data available today remain extremely sparse, which weakens any claims that can be made, and is not sufficient to assert that letrozole is safe and effective in the treatment of EPs. There is an absolute need for randomized studies with accurate patient selection, fixed doses, large sample sizes, and reporting of short- and long-term side effects to refute or confirm this assumption.