Primary abdominal pregnancy following intra-uterine insemination

Case report OA: gold CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-06 ⓘ

This case report describes a primary abdominal pregnancy following intra-uterine insemination, with implantation on the anterior uterus possibly related to an endometriotic focus, managed via laparoscopy.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-25 · read from full text ⓘ

This case report describes a 31-year-old woman who developed a primary abdominal pregnancy following intra-uterine insemination for infertility. The patient had a history of mild pelvic endometriosis, which was documented during a prior diagnostic laparoscopy two months before conception. Laparoscopic removal of the gestational sac implanted on the broad ligament confirmed that the ectopic implantation site was associated with existing endometriotic foci. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically, it illustrates how endometriotic lesions can serve as an implantation site for primary abdominal pregnancies in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technologies.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Primary abdominal pregnancy is an extremely rare type of extrauterine pregnancy. It has been reported from many unusual intra-abdominal sites. We report a case of primary abdominal pregnancy following intra-uterine insemination (not reported earlier to our knowledge). Implanted on the anterior surface of the uterus possibly related to an endometriotic foci. Early diagnosis enabled laparoscopic management of this case.
Full text 7,498 characters · extracted from pmc-nxml · 4 sections · click to expand

Case

Mrs. Y.P, a 31-year-old female, attended our OPD on 22 nd August 2010, with chief complaints of amenorrhea of 2 months, following an IUI cycle. She had primary infertility of 3 years, and was undergoing IUI for mild-to-moderate male factor coupled with mild pelvic endometriosis. This was her first IUI cycle (CC1 00 mg D2-D6, HCG trigger, and dydrogestrone as luteal support). Urine pregnancy test was negative on two ocasions after IUI. She had no other complaints [Figures 1 – 6 ]. The undisturbed ectopic gestation sac seen on the anterior surface of the uterus and anterior leaf of broad ligament The ectopic pregnancy site which started to bleed,on manipulation of the uterus Bleeding ectopic sac separating from peritoneal surface Protruding gestational sac Bleeding from the implantation site after gestational sac was sucked out Implantation site after removal of ectopic sac and hemostasis Her previous menstrual cycles were regular. LMP was performed 28.06.2010. Double IUI was done on 12 th and 13 th July 2010. She was amenorrhoeic for almost 9 weeks. On transvaginal sonography, the uterus was bulky, very thick regular echogenic endometrium, and no gestational sac in cavity [ Figure 7 ]. Both ovaries were normal with a corpus luteum in the left ovary [Figures 8 and 9 ]. There was a 1.6 cm mass with strongly echogenic rim, close to the uterus, in the left side suggestive of an ectopic pregnancy sac. Serum b-HCG in the same day was 9470 mIU/ml [Figures 10 and 11 ]. Uterus with empty endometrial cavity Transvaginal scan showing left ovary with a corpus luteum Image of the normal right ovary Transvaginal sonography showing ectopic gestational sac in the region of the left adnexa Transvaginal sonography picture showing both the empty uterus and adjacent ectopic sac Laparoscopy was offered to the patient, who however, desperately requested for the conservative approach (she had undergone diagnostic hystero-laparoscopy 2 months back during her infertility workup , and also did not want to loose a fallopian tube). She was given one intramascular injection of methotrexate (50 mg) on 22.08.2010 following routine blood tests. However, follow-up of serial b-HCG on 26.08.2010 showed persisting levels of 9300 mIU/ml and transvaginal sonography showed a size of the mass increased to 2 cm. She was taken up for laparoscopic surgery on 28.08.2010. At laparoscopy uterus was bulky, deviated to the right side with a few old and new endometriotic deposits on the antero-superior surface. Both the fallopian tubes and ovaries were normal. Pouch of Douglas was free. No fresh or old blood was found in the peritoneal cavity. The pregnancy sac was implanted on the peritoneal surface of the broad ligament,between the round ligament and the utero-vesical fold. Initial appearance was a mound-like elevation, with yellowish brown margins [Figures 1 and 2 ]. Fresh bleeding started only upon manipulation of the uterus. Gestational sac was sucked out [Figures 3 and 4 ]. There was significant bleeding from the base [ Figure 5 ], which was controlled with bipolar coagulation and superficial infiltration of Pitressin [ Figure 6 ]. Endometrial curettage was performed. The product of conception retrieved was sent for histopathology [ Figure 12 ]. The patient made an uneventful postoperative recovery. β-HCG fell to 203 IU within 4 days, and subsequently declined to non-pregnant levels. Histopathology picture showing chorionic villi, bleeding, and no tubal epithelium. (a and b) Low and high magnification

Discussion

Most gynecologists would not encounter a case of abdominal pregnancy during their career. Incidence has been reported as approximately 1 in 10,000 live births,[ 1 ] and 9.2 per 1000 ectopic pregnancies.[ 4 ] Most of these are secondary abdominal pregnancies, which means the embryo had primarily implanted in the fallopian tube, extruded, or expelled and then secondarily implanted itself on another intra-abdominal surface.[ 4 ] In primary abdominal pregnancy, which is the rarest type of ectopic gestation, the conceptus implants on the peritoneal surface. Studdiford's criteria used to diagnose primary abdominal pregnancy are described as: The presence of normal bilateral tubes and ovaries with no evidence of recent or past pregnancy. No evidence of a uteroperitoneal fistula. The presence of pregnancy related exclusively to the peritoneal surface, early enough to eliminate the possibility of secondary implantation after primary tubal nidation.[ 5 ] The presence of normal bilateral tubes and ovaries with no evidence of recent or past pregnancy. No evidence of a uteroperitoneal fistula. The presence of pregnancy related exclusively to the peritoneal surface, early enough to eliminate the possibility of secondary implantation after primary tubal nidation.[ 5 ] Alternatively, a classification relevant from diagnosis and treatment defines early peritoneal pregnancy (≥20 weeks of gestation) or advanced (≤20 weeks of gestation).[ 6 ] Primary abdominal pregnancies have been reported from omentum, sigmoid colon, posterior peritoneum of pelvis, spleen, liver, diaphragm, obturator foramen, posterior surface of uterus, retroperitoneum, and pancreas.[ 7 – 21 ] Primary peritoneal pregnancy has been reported in relation to foci of endometriosis.[ 21 22 ] ART has contributed significantly to the increased incidence of ectopic pregnancies. Rare and new varieties of ectopics such as heterotopic pregnancies, cervical, cesarean scar pregnancies have surfaced. However, the incidence of abdominal pregnancies has not changed, may be reduced due to early diagnosis.[ 23 24 ] Presentation of patents with primary abdominal pregnancy varies greatly,[ 6 ] however, with early diagnosis like our case, patients may be totally asymptomatic. In earlier literature abdominal pregnancies were typically diagnosed late. Now with serial b-HCG, excellent ultrasonography, and MRI facilities, these pregnancies are diagnosed much earlier.[ 25 26 ] Our case is unique in some aspects. To our knowledge, this is the only case reported of primary peritoneal pregnancy in the anterior peritoneal leaf of the broad ligament following intrauterine insemination. The implantation appears to be related to endometriotic foci. The presence of uterine surface endometriosis was documented by a routine diagnosis laparoscopy only 2 months earlier.

Conclusions

With early diagnosis laparoscopic management becomes feasible. Prognosis for future fertility also appears good following early diagnosis, as the tubes, ovaries are not directly involved in pregnancy, nor removed during the operative procedure and are not involved in postoperative adhesion formation. Future fertility does not appear to be adversely affected.[ 6 ]

Introduction

Primary abdominal pregnancy is possibly the rarest form of extrauterine gestation. Incidence is not known. Abdominal pregnancies (both primary and secondary) have a reported incidence of 1 in 10,000.[ 1 ] Worldwide, the incidence of ectopic pregnancies is increasing, with significant contribution from assisted reproductive technologies (ART).[ 2 ] However, the incidence of abdominal pregnancies have remained constant or reduced, and maternal mortality reduced from 20% to less than 5% in last 20 years[ 3 ] due to early diagnosis and management. Early diagnosis has enabled laparoscopic management in many of these cases. In this study, we report a case of primary abdominal pregnancy following intra-uterine insemination (IUI) managed laparoscopically.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: pmc-nxml ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-10-11T09:27:45.537177+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:09:35.770675+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-21T05:10:58.409756+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0