Abstract
A randomized, prospective clinical trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic treatment with conventional conservative abdominal surgery for tubal pregnancy. Entry criteria were: size of the ectopic gestation < 4 cm, hemodynamic stability, accessibility for laparoscopic treatment and a trained laparoscopist on duty. There was no difference between the groups regarding gestational duration, size and location of the ectopic gestation, or the mean preoperative hCG values. The groups differed with respect to total operation time (73 min for the laparoscopy group vs. 88 min for the laparotomy group), hospital stay (2.2 vs. 5.4 days) and convalescence period (11 vs. 24 days). The rates of elimination of hCG was similar in the groups, and there were no statistical difference in the rate of second intervention.