J-F Zhai1, M Xu, B Zhang, J-W Gao, N Chen. 1. Obstetrics and Gynecology Department in Central Hospital, The Affiliated Xuzhou Hospital of Medical College of Southeast University, Xuzhou Clinical Medical College, Xuzhou Clinical Medical College of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Xuzhou City, Jiangsu Province, China. bettyzhang10@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this essay is to explore the treatments of caesarean scar pregnancy and the corresponding results during the past ten years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: There were 56 cases of caesarean scar pregnancy in the past ten years which were divided into two groups. Group A included 22 cases in the first five years from January 2004 to December 2008, and group B had 34 cases in the last five years from January 2009 to December 2013. Analysis and statistical treatments are performed according to the comparison of the general state, severity, therapeutic condition and results in both groups. RESULTS: We found that the operation rate of group A is lower than that of group B while the average hospitalization and follow-up time of group A are longer than that of group B. The re-hospitalization rate of group A is 22.73% (5/22) and is higher than 11.76% of group B (4/34). The vagina bleeding rate of group A is 27.27% (6/22) and is higher than 2.94% of group B (1/34). CONCLUSIONS: With the increasingly deep-rooted concept of minimally invasive technique in gynecology, minimally invasive therapy becomes increasingly popular for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy. The advantages include short treatment period and follow-up time and safe therapy which to some extent reduces the burden and mental pressure of patients.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this essay is to explore the treatments of caesarean scar pregnancy and the corresponding results during the past ten years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: There were 56 cases of caesarean scar pregnancy in the past ten years which were divided into two groups. Group A included 22 cases in the first five years from January 2004 to December 2008, and group B had 34 cases in the last five years from January 2009 to December 2013. Analysis and statistical treatments are performed according to the comparison of the general state, severity, therapeutic condition and results in both groups. RESULTS: We found that the operation rate of group A is lower than that of group B while the average hospitalization and follow-up time of group A are longer than that of group B. The re-hospitalization rate of group A is 22.73% (5/22) and is higher than 11.76% of group B (4/34). The vagina bleeding rate of group A is 27.27% (6/22) and is higher than 2.94% of group B (1/34). CONCLUSIONS: With the increasingly deep-rooted concept of minimally invasive technique in gynecology, minimally invasive therapy becomes increasingly popular for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy. The advantages include short treatment period and follow-up time and safe therapy which to some extent reduces the burden and mental pressure of patients.