Cargando…
Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study
INTRODUCTION: There is no global agreement on how to best determine pregnancy of unknown location viability and location using biomarkers. Measurements of progesterone and β human chorionic gonadotropin (βhCG) are still used in clinical practice to exclude the possibility of a viable intrauterine pr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9564682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34817062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14295 |
_version_ | 1784808705832779776 |
---|---|
author | Bobdiwala, Shabnam Kyriacou, Christopher Christodoulou, Evangelia Farren, Jessica Mitchell‐Jones, Nicola Al‐Memar, Maya Ayim, Francis Chohan, Baljinder Kirk, Emma Abughazza, Osama Guruwadahyarhalli, Bramara Guha, Sharmistha Vathanan, Veluppillai Gould, Debbie Stalder, Catriona Timmerman, Dirk Van Calster, Ben Bourne, Tom |
author_facet | Bobdiwala, Shabnam Kyriacou, Christopher Christodoulou, Evangelia Farren, Jessica Mitchell‐Jones, Nicola Al‐Memar, Maya Ayim, Francis Chohan, Baljinder Kirk, Emma Abughazza, Osama Guruwadahyarhalli, Bramara Guha, Sharmistha Vathanan, Veluppillai Gould, Debbie Stalder, Catriona Timmerman, Dirk Van Calster, Ben Bourne, Tom |
author_sort | Bobdiwala, Shabnam |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: There is no global agreement on how to best determine pregnancy of unknown location viability and location using biomarkers. Measurements of progesterone and β human chorionic gonadotropin (βhCG) are still used in clinical practice to exclude the possibility of a viable intrauterine pregnancy (VIUP). We evaluate the predictive value of progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio cut‐off levels to exclude a VIUP in women with a pregnancy of unknown location. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of prospective multicenter study data of consecutive women with a pregnancy of unknown location between January 2015 and 2017 collected from dedicated early pregnancy assessment units of eight hospitals. Single progesterone and serial βhCG measurements were taken. Women were followed up until final pregnancy outcome between 11 and 14 weeks of gestation was confirmed using transvaginal ultrasonography: (1) VIUP, (2) non‐viable intrauterine pregnancy or failed pregnancy of unknown location, and (3) ectopic pregnancy or persisting pregnancy of unknown location. The predictive value of cut‐off levels for ruling out VIUP were evaluated across a range of values likely to be encountered clinically for progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio. RESULTS: Data from 2507 of 3272 (76.6%) women were suitable for analysis. All had data for βhCG levels, 2248 (89.7%) had progesterone levels, and 1809 (72.2%) had βhCG ratio. The likelihood of viability falls with the progesterone level. Although the median progesterone level associated with viability was 59 nmol/L, VIUP were identified with levels as low as 5 nmol/L. No single βhCG cut‐off reliably ruled out the presence of viability with certainty, even when the level was more than 3000 IU/L, there were 39/358 (11%) women who had a VIUP. The probability of viability decreases with the βhCG ratio. Although the median βhCG ratio associated with viability was 2.26, VIUP were identified with ratios as low as 1.02. A progesterone level below 2 nmol/L and βhCG ratio below 0.87 were unlikely to be associated with viability but were not definitive when considering multiple imputation. CONCLUSIONS: Cut‐off levels for βhCG, βhCG ratio, and progesterone are not safe to be used clinically to exclude viability in early pregnancy. Although βhCG ratio and progesterone have slightly better performance in comparison, single βhCG used in this manner is highly unreliable. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9564682 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95646822022-12-06 Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study Bobdiwala, Shabnam Kyriacou, Christopher Christodoulou, Evangelia Farren, Jessica Mitchell‐Jones, Nicola Al‐Memar, Maya Ayim, Francis Chohan, Baljinder Kirk, Emma Abughazza, Osama Guruwadahyarhalli, Bramara Guha, Sharmistha Vathanan, Veluppillai Gould, Debbie Stalder, Catriona Timmerman, Dirk Van Calster, Ben Bourne, Tom Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Gynecology INTRODUCTION: There is no global agreement on how to best determine pregnancy of unknown location viability and location using biomarkers. Measurements of progesterone and β human chorionic gonadotropin (βhCG) are still used in clinical practice to exclude the possibility of a viable intrauterine pregnancy (VIUP). We evaluate the predictive value of progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio cut‐off levels to exclude a VIUP in women with a pregnancy of unknown location. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of prospective multicenter study data of consecutive women with a pregnancy of unknown location between January 2015 and 2017 collected from dedicated early pregnancy assessment units of eight hospitals. Single progesterone and serial βhCG measurements were taken. Women were followed up until final pregnancy outcome between 11 and 14 weeks of gestation was confirmed using transvaginal ultrasonography: (1) VIUP, (2) non‐viable intrauterine pregnancy or failed pregnancy of unknown location, and (3) ectopic pregnancy or persisting pregnancy of unknown location. The predictive value of cut‐off levels for ruling out VIUP were evaluated across a range of values likely to be encountered clinically for progesterone, βhCG, and βhCG ratio. RESULTS: Data from 2507 of 3272 (76.6%) women were suitable for analysis. All had data for βhCG levels, 2248 (89.7%) had progesterone levels, and 1809 (72.2%) had βhCG ratio. The likelihood of viability falls with the progesterone level. Although the median progesterone level associated with viability was 59 nmol/L, VIUP were identified with levels as low as 5 nmol/L. No single βhCG cut‐off reliably ruled out the presence of viability with certainty, even when the level was more than 3000 IU/L, there were 39/358 (11%) women who had a VIUP. The probability of viability decreases with the βhCG ratio. Although the median βhCG ratio associated with viability was 2.26, VIUP were identified with ratios as low as 1.02. A progesterone level below 2 nmol/L and βhCG ratio below 0.87 were unlikely to be associated with viability but were not definitive when considering multiple imputation. CONCLUSIONS: Cut‐off levels for βhCG, βhCG ratio, and progesterone are not safe to be used clinically to exclude viability in early pregnancy. Although βhCG ratio and progesterone have slightly better performance in comparison, single βhCG used in this manner is highly unreliable. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9564682/ /pubmed/34817062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14295 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Gynecology Bobdiwala, Shabnam Kyriacou, Christopher Christodoulou, Evangelia Farren, Jessica Mitchell‐Jones, Nicola Al‐Memar, Maya Ayim, Francis Chohan, Baljinder Kirk, Emma Abughazza, Osama Guruwadahyarhalli, Bramara Guha, Sharmistha Vathanan, Veluppillai Gould, Debbie Stalder, Catriona Timmerman, Dirk Van Calster, Ben Bourne, Tom Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title | Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title_full | Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title_fullStr | Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title_short | Evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: A prospective multicenter cohort study |
title_sort | evaluating cut‐off levels for progesterone, β human chorionic gonadotropin and β human chorionic gonadotropin ratio to exclude pregnancy viability in women with a pregnancy of unknown location: a prospective multicenter cohort study |
topic | Gynecology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9564682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34817062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14295 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bobdiwalashabnam evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT kyriacouchristopher evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT christodoulouevangelia evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT farrenjessica evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT mitchelljonesnicola evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT almemarmaya evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT ayimfrancis evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT chohanbaljinder evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT kirkemma evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT abughazzaosama evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT guruwadahyarhallibramara evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT guhasharmistha evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT vathananveluppillai evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT goulddebbie evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT staldercatriona evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT timmermandirk evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT vancalsterben evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy AT bournetom evaluatingcutofflevelsforprogesteronebhumanchorionicgonadotropinandbhumanchorionicgonadotropinratiotoexcludepregnancyviabilityinwomenwithapregnancyofunknownlocationaprospectivemulticentercohortstudy |