LAUSR

BACKGROUND Ectopic pregnancy (EP) is one of the most common acute abdominal diseases in gynecology. Once the condition of EP is delayed, it may lead to massive hemorrhage, shock, and even death in a short time, seriously threatening the patient’s life. Early diagnosis is the key to preventing and improving the prognosis of EP. Transabdominal ultrasound (TAS) and transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) are the main diagnostic methods for abdominal diseases. The purpose of this study is to explore the application value and effect of TAS and TVS in the diagnosis of EP, hoping to provide more valuable references for the diagnosis of EP. AIM To explore the application value of TAS and TVS in the diagnosis of EP and to improve the level of clinical diagnosis. METHODS A total of 140 patients with EP admitted to our hospital from July 2018 to July 2020 were selected for this study. All patients were divided into two groups according to the examination methods. 63 patients who underwent abdominal ultrasound examination were set as the TAS group, while 77 patients who underwent TVS examination were set as the TVS group. We compared the diagnostic accuracy and misdiagnosis rates between the two types of ultrasound examinations, as well as the postoperative pathological results of the two diagnostic methods for different types of ectopic pregnancies. We also analyzed the sonograms for the presence of mixed ectopic masses, adnexal masses, ectopic gestational sacs, the presence or absence of visible embryo and fetal heart in the ectopic sac shadow, and the detection of fluid in the rectal fossa of the uterus, such as the adnexal area, yolk sac, and embryo, etc. In addition, the diagnosis time, days of gestational sac appearance, operation time, endometrial thickness, and blood flow resistance index were compared as well. RESULTS After performing both types of ultrasound examinations in 140 patients with EP, we found that the diagnostic accuracy of TVS was significantly higher than that of TAS, and the misdiagnosis rate was significantly lower than that of TAS. The differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). In addition, the detection rate of TVS was better than that of TAS for the presence of mixed masses, adnexal masses, ectopic gestational sacs, the presence or absence of visible embryo and fetal heart in the shadow of the ectopic sac, and sonograms such as the adnexal area, yolk sac, and embryo, etc. The coincidence rate of its postoperative pathological examination results was significantly higher than those of TAS. The diagnosis time and the days of gestational sac appearance by TVS were significantly shorter than that by TAS, and the operation time was earlier than that by TAS. What’s more, the detection rates of the endometrial thickness £ 1.5 mm and blood flow resistance £ 0.5 were significantly higher in TVS diagnosis of EP than in TAS. All differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION Compared with TAS, TVS has the advantages of high detection accuracy and good sonogram performance.