Endometrial stripe thickness in tubal and intrauterine pregnancies

Levgur, Michael; Tsai, Tony; Kang, Katherine; Feldman, Joseph; Kory, Leslie A

« Previous Next »Fertility and Sterility
Volume 74, Issue 5 , Pages 889-891, November 2000

Endometrial stripe thickness in tubal and intrauterine pregnancies

Presented at the 53rd annual meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 18–22, 1997.

Michael Levgur, M.D.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York, USA
- Present address: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York.
- Reprint requests: Michael Levgur, M.D., Maimonides Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 967 48th Street, Brooklyn, New York 11219 (FAX: 718-283-8468 )
Tony Tsai, M.D.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York, USA
- Present address: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York.
Katherine Kang, M.D.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York, USA
- Present address: Department of Obstetics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Services, University of California—San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Joseph Feldman (Dr.P.H.)
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, SUNY Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York, USA
Leslie A Kory, M.D.
- Department of Radiology, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Brooklyn, New York, USA

Received 22 February 2000; accepted 25 May 2000.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate endometrial stripe thickness (EST) among patients with tubal pregnancy (TP) and intrauterine pregnancy (IUP).

Design: Historical cohort.

Setting: City hospital.

Patient(s): Ninety-four women suspected to have TP.

Intervention(s): Serum βHCG and sonographic EST measurements.

Main Outcome Measure(s): Comparison of age, gestational age (GA), EST, and log βHCG.

Result(s): The two groups of women, 65 with TP and 29 with IUP, had similar mean ages (±SD) of 28.6 ± 5.7 and 28.6 ± 6.1, respectively. The median values of GA in the 2 groups were similar, 46.6 and 44.6 d, respectively. The mean values for EST (±SD), adjusted for GA, were significantly different: 9.9 ± 5.9 mm in the TP group and 12.6 ± 5.3 mm in the IUP group. The mean values (±SD) of log βHCG in the 2 groups also differed significantly: 6.90 ± 1.29 and 7.52 ± 0.97, respectively. No correlation was found between EST and GA or log βHCG within either group.

Conclusion(s): The mean EST in women with TP was significantly smaller than in women with IUP. The wide range of EST values and their overlap precludes the utilization of EST as a single feature in the diagnosis of a tubal pregnancy.

Keywords: Tubal pregnancy, intrauterine pregnancy, endometrial stripe thickness, log βHCG