Literature DB >> 28631355

Quantitative risk assessment to guide the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.

Qingxian Fang1, Li Sun1, Yunhui Tang1, Cuifeng Qian1, Xiaoying Yao1,2,3,4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a risk-factor scoring system for the prediction of bleeding during ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage (D&C) for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).
METHODS: The retrospective study included patients with a CSP of 31-67 days who underwent transabdominal ultrasonography-guided D&C in 2010-2014. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for the need of Foley catheter hemostasis. The predictive accuracy of a risk-scoring system based on significant factors was evaluated by receiver operating curve analysis.
RESULTS: Among 82 included patients, 66 (80%) were successfully treated without any complications, whereas 16 (20%) required Foley catheter compression hemostasis. Four patients who received the Foley catheter needed further treatment. A longer pregnancy duration (odds ratio 1.171, 95% confidence interval 1.050-1.305; P=0.004) and a rich blood supply on ultrasonography (odds ratio 3.282, 95% confidence interval 1.441-4.742; P=0.005) were significant risk factors for the need of compression hemostasis. A scoring system based on these two risk factors would have identified 93.8% of patients requiring compression hemostasis if the optimum cutoff score was used.
CONCLUSION: Heavy bleeding during transabdominal ultrasound-guided D&C for CSP is associated with a longer pregnancy duration and a rich blood supply on ultrasonography. The new risk-scoring system can be used to predict bleeding during surgery.
© 2017 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cesarean scar pregnancy; Hemorrhage; Risk assessment; Risk-factor scoring system; Transabdominal ultrasound-guided suction curettage

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28631355     DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet        ISSN: 0020-7292            Impact factor:   3.561


  6 in total

Review 1.  Cesarean scar pregnancy - a new challenge for obstetricians.

Authors:  Piotr Pędraszewski; Edyta Wlaźlak; Wojciech Panek; Grzegorz Surkont
Journal:  J Ultrason       Date:  2018-03-30

2.  Validation of a 10-Point Scoring System for Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy.

Authors:  Ting-Ting Tan; Qiu-Lei Sun; Li Luo; Zhu Chen; Xi Xiong; Jin-Hong Xiang; Ping Yan; Chun-Yan Gao; Zheng-Qiong Chen
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 2.423

3.  The Efficacy and Health Economics of Different Treatments for Type 1 Cesarean Scar Pregnancy.

Authors:  Tingting Hong; Zeying Chai; Manman Liu; Lingzhi Zheng; Feng Qi
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 5.810

4.  Selection of Laparoscopy or Laparotomy for Treating Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Peiying Fu; Ting Zhou; Pengfei Cui; Wenwen Wang; Shixuan Wang; Ronghua Liu
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2022-09-13

5.  A Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Curettage With and Without Uterine Artery Embolization on Controlling Intraoperative Blood Loss for a Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Treatment: Study Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Yunhui Tang; Yi Zhang; Hanqing Tang; Jiahui Che; Hua Feng; Xiaoying Yao; Qi Chen
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 5.555

6.  A comparison between laparoscopy and hysteroscopy approach in treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.

Authors:  Xiaolei Zhang; Yingxin Pang; Yanhui Ma; Xin Liu; Lin Cheng; Yanli Ban; Baoxia Cui
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 1.817

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.