| Literature DB >> 27602071 |
Ying Feng1, Suwen Chen1, Changdong Li1, Xiaofeng Zhang1, Hua Duan1, Suren Sooranna2, Mark R Johnson2, Jian Li1.
Abstract
In the present study, we evaluated the diagnosis and management modalities of caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). Thirty patients diagnosed with CSP were retrospectively studied between February, 2010 and February, 2012. Twenty-five patients were offered prophylactic uterine artery embolization (UAE) and methotrexate (MTX) prior to uterine suction curettage. Five cases were referred from other hospitals where the initial management with uterine suction curettage had resulted in uncontrollable massive haemorrhage, 4 of the cases had UAE and one proceeded immediately to hysterectomy. In the 25 patients treated with prophylactic UAE and MTX, 12 had laparoscopy-guided curettage and 13 had ultrasound-guided curettage without complication. The results showed that the 25 patients with CSP, who received prophylactic UAE and MTX prior to uterine curettage, recovered without complications. Five patients referred from other hospitals, where uterine curettage was the primary procedure, had severe complications including uncontrolled vaginal bleeding and uterine rupture. Four of the five patients were treated successfully with emergency UAE and the remaining patient underwent emergency hysterectomy as ultrasound examination detected significant haemorrhage between the uterus and the bladder. Of the 25 patients who received prophylactic UAE combined with MTX, there were no reports of irregular menstruation or serious adverse effects. Notably, the decrease in serum human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) levels 3 days post-surgery was greater with ultrasound-guided curettage (84.3±5.5%) than with laparoscopy-guided curettage (76.3±10.2%). In summary, the data suggested that prophylactic UAE with MTX followed by ultrasound-guided curettage is the most effective therapeutic approach in CSP.Entities:
Keywords: caesarean scar pregnancy; human chorionic gonadotrophin; methotrexate; suction curettage; uterine artery embolization
Year: 2016 PMID: 27602071 PMCID: PMC4998184 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2016.3489
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
Characteristics of the clinical cases.
| Values | Age (years) | No. of previous caesarean sections | No. of pregnancies | Interval time from recent caesarean section (years) | Gestation (weeks) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 32.20±4.83 | 1.20±0.61 | 3.60±1.55 | 4.45±1.34 | 8.34±3.70 |
| Range (min - max) | 23–43 | 1–4 | 2–7 | 6 months-12 years | 5–12 |
Figure 1.Two examples of echo-images of CSP. Images were captured from a 30-year-old woman at 6 weeks of CSP with a history of one caesarean delivery. (A) TAS showing the midline of the uterus. (B) Transverse TVS showing the midline of the uterus. Arrow shows pregnant scar. CSP, caesarean scar pregnancy; TAS, transabdominal sonography; TVS, transvaginal sonography.
Figure 2.Highly selective uterine artery angiograms. A 30-year-old woman with a history of one caesarean delivery having CSP at 6 weeks underwent preventive UAE. (A-G) Before UAE, selective uterine artery angiograms demonstrated enlarged and tortuous uterine arteries, with a hypervascular region overlying the lower uterine segment corresponding to the CSP region. (H and I) CSP image disappeared after an arterial occlusion was successfully achieved. CSP, caesarean scar pregnancy; UAE, uterine artery embolization.
A comparison of the different types of clinical cases.
| Clinical presentation | Vaginal bleeding | Abdominal pain | Vaginal bleeding abdominal pain | Asymptomatic | Massive bleeding after curettage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | 11 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Percentage | 36.67% | 3.33% | 16.67% | 26.67% | 16.67% |
Figure 3.Dissection of uterus with CSP after hysterectomy. A 42-year-old woman with a history of one caesarean delivery had CSP for 8 weeks. She had uncontrolled haemorrhage due to CSP uterus rupture. (A) Whole uterus, (B) the gestational sac implanted into the caesarean scar myometrium, (C) chorionic villi from pregnancy at the caesarean scar, and (D) the sagittal angle of the cavity with respect to the scar tissue. CSP, caesarean scar pregnancy.
A comparison of operative outcomes between laparoscopy-guided curettage and ultrasound-guided curettage.
| No. of previous caesarean sections | No. of previous abortion | Apart time of previous caesarean section (years) | Blood loss volume (ml) | Menstrual cycle recovery (days) | Rate of serum β-HCG reduction (%)[ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ultrasound-guided curettage | 1.14±0.3 | 1.86±1.03 | 3.71±3.36 | 17.50±4.16 | 37.14±3.79 | 88.43±10.50 |
| Laparoscopy-guided curettage | 1.09±0.30 | 2.82±1.83 | 4.01±2.59 | 15.91±3.36 | 36.64±1.36 | 76.31±15.23 |
| P-value | 0.70 | 0.14 | 0.80 | 0.83 | 0.43 | 0.04 |
The reduction rate of serum HCG = preoperative serum HCG - postoperative serum HCG (three days after operation)/preoperative serum HCG. HCG, human chorionic gonadotropin.
Figure 4.Laparoscopic image of CSP showing a topical purple bulge in the lower segment over the caesarean scar from a patient with CSP. CSP, caesarean scar pregnancy.
Figure 5.Laparoscopic image of CSP showing the uterine segment with some large adhesions together with the surrounding tissues and caesarean scars from a patient with CSP. CSP, caesarean scar pregnancy.