Jiawen Wu1, Jianbin Ye2, Zhenbo OuYang3, Zixian Wan1, Qiushi Zhang1, Biting Zhong1, Shiyuan Wei1. 1. Department of Gynecology, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China. 2. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Puning People's Hospital, Puning, China. 3. Department of Gynecology, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China. Electronic address: ouyangzhenbo@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the reproductive outcomes of women with a history of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and the influence of various treatments on subsequent pregnancy outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: The PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were searched for studies with the outcomes of pregnancy after CSP treatment. Studies that reported reproductive outcomes after CSP with more than 5 followed cases were included. The main data collected includes the treatment methods of CSP and subsequent pregnancy outcomes. The main information includes intrauterine pregnancy, recurrent CSP (RCSP), and spontaneous miscarriage, while the secondary information includes complications during pregnancies and the outcomes of childbirths. According to different treatments (conservative treatment, surgical treatment without resection of cesarean scar, and surgical treatment with resection of cesarean scar), a stratified analysis was carried out to compare the influence of treatments on subsequent pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies including 3380 cases of CSP met the inclusion criteria, of which 583 cases conceived again after treatment (including 292 cases of unexpected pregnancy), and finally 178 cases delivered successfully. The follow-up time ranged from 3 to 72 months. Among women with fertility requirements, a total of 291 cases in 403 women were successfully conceived during the follow-up period in 15 studies. Thence the pregnancy rate of women with fertility requirements was 76.2 %. Among all of the 583 successfully conceived women, 83.4 % of them had intrauterine pregnancy, while 15.3 % of cases were RCSP. The total ectopic pregnancy rate reached 16.6 %, covering RCSP and other sites of ectopic pregnancy. 14.6 % of intrauterine pregnancy experienced spontaneous miscarriage. The intrauterine pregnancy rates of the conservative treatment group, the surgical treatment without resection of cesarean scar group, and the surgical treatment with resection of cesarean scar group were 93.1 %, 80.1 % and 86.0 % respectively; the corresponding RCSP rates were 6.9 %, 15.6 % and 14.0 % respectively; and the corresponding spontaneous miscarriage rates were 20.7 %, 13.9 % and 22.2 % respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of reproduction after CSP included intrauterine pregnancy, RCSP and other sites of ectopic pregnancy. Women with a history of CSP still have a high pregnancy rate, but the risk of RCSP and spontaneous miscarriage is also increased. It is impossible to clarify the effect of different treatments on subsequent pregnancy. Whether the resection and repair of cesarean scar can ameliorate reproductive outcomes needs to be further assessed. Further large-scale prospective studies, even RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to expound the outcomes of reproduction after CSP and the effect of different treatments on subsequent reproductive outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To explore the reproductive outcomes of women with a history of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and the influence of various treatments on subsequent pregnancy outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: The PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were searched for studies with the outcomes of pregnancy after CSP treatment. Studies that reported reproductive outcomes after CSP with more than 5 followed cases were included. The main data collected includes the treatment methods of CSP and subsequent pregnancy outcomes. The main information includes intrauterine pregnancy, recurrent CSP (RCSP), and spontaneous miscarriage, while the secondary information includes complications during pregnancies and the outcomes of childbirths. According to different treatments (conservative treatment, surgical treatment without resection of cesarean scar, and surgical treatment with resection of cesarean scar), a stratified analysis was carried out to compare the influence of treatments on subsequent pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies including 3380 cases of CSP met the inclusion criteria, of which 583 cases conceived again after treatment (including 292 cases of unexpected pregnancy), and finally 178 cases delivered successfully. The follow-up time ranged from 3 to 72 months. Among women with fertility requirements, a total of 291 cases in 403 women were successfully conceived during the follow-up period in 15 studies. Thence the pregnancy rate of women with fertility requirements was 76.2 %. Among all of the 583 successfully conceived women, 83.4 % of them had intrauterine pregnancy, while 15.3 % of cases were RCSP. The total ectopic pregnancy rate reached 16.6 %, covering RCSP and other sites of ectopic pregnancy. 14.6 % of intrauterine pregnancy experienced spontaneous miscarriage. The intrauterine pregnancy rates of the conservative treatment group, the surgical treatment without resection of cesarean scar group, and the surgical treatment with resection of cesarean scar group were 93.1 %, 80.1 % and 86.0 % respectively; the corresponding RCSP rates were 6.9 %, 15.6 % and 14.0 % respectively; and the corresponding spontaneous miscarriage rates were 20.7 %, 13.9 % and 22.2 % respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of reproduction after CSP included intrauterine pregnancy, RCSP and other sites of ectopic pregnancy. Women with a history of CSP still have a high pregnancy rate, but the risk of RCSP and spontaneous miscarriage is also increased. It is impossible to clarify the effect of different treatments on subsequent pregnancy. Whether the resection and repair of cesarean scar can ameliorate reproductive outcomes needs to be further assessed. Further large-scale prospective studies, even RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to expound the outcomes of reproduction after CSP and the effect of different treatments on subsequent reproductive outcomes.
Authors: Manuel Sánchez-Prieto; María Jesús Puy; Núria Barbany; Betlem Graupera; Maria Angela Pascual; Pere Barri-Soldevila Journal: Case Rep Obstet Gynecol Date: 2022-06-22