| Literature DB >> 35014555 |
Jiangdong Xiang1, Yannan Cao1, Lina Zhou1, Haiying Yang1, Sufang Wu1, Linxia Li2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the risk factors associated with the necessity of laparoscopic scar defect repair for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).Entities:
Keywords: Cesarean scar pregnancy; laparoscopy; magnetic resonance imaging; myometrial thickness; operative treatment; suction curettage
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35014555 PMCID: PMC8755938 DOI: 10.1177/03000605211070753
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Med Res ISSN: 0300-0605 Impact factor: 1.671
Figure 1.Magnetic resonance imaging measurements for the dimensions of the gestational sac. Diameter “a” is the maximum longitudinal diameter of the gestational sac, which is measured as the distance between the two ends of the longitudinal axis. Diameter “b” is the maximum transverse diameter of the gestational sac, which is measured as the distance from the most anterior of the gestational sac at the incision to the posterior uterine wall of the lower uterine segment. Thinning or absence of the myometrium between the gestational sac and the bladder can be seen (blue arrow). The dotted yellow line on a sagittal section of the uterus indicates the level of a previous lower uterine segment cesarean section scar.
Figure 2.Transvaginal ultrasound imaging and magnetic resonance imaging of a cesarean scar pregnancy. (a) Transvaginal ultrasound image shows a gestational sac (yellow arrow) embedded at the scar site of a previous CS with an empty uterine cavity and cervical canal. (b) Color Doppler shows a rich blood supply surrounding the GS. (c) Sagittal magnetic resonance image shows a GS (yellow arrow) embedded at the site of a previous CS scar.
GS, gestational sac; CS, cesarean section.
Comparison of clinical characteristics of patients with cesarean scar pregnancy in the two groups.
| Characteristic | Suction curettage group, n = 199 | Laparoscopic repair group, n = 38 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maternal age (years) | 31.61 ± 4.85 | 32.13 ± 5.37 | 0.553 |
| Gravidity (n) | 3.09 ± 1.47 | 3.42 ± 1.27 | 0.197 |
| Parity (n) | 1.47 ± 0.56 | 1.50 ± 0.56 | 0.780 |
| Number of prior CSs | 1.45 ± 0.54 | 1.47 ± 0.51 | 0.779 |
| Interval since the last CS (months) | 68.79 ± 51.39 | 71.21 ± 46.98 | 0.788 |
| Symptoms at diagnosis, n (%) | 0.128 | ||
| Abdominal pain | 6 (3.01) | 1 (2.63) | |
| Vaginal bleeding | 90 (45.23) | 23 (60.53) | |
| Both | 33 (16.58) | 8 (21.05) | |
| None | 70 (35.18) | 6 (15.79) | |
| Gestational age (days) | 51.75 ± 13.72 | 61.58 ± 21.70 | 0.010 |
| MTD of the gestational sac (mm) | 17.27 ± 6.82 | 22.63 ± 8.40 | <0.001 |
| MLD of the gestational sac (mm) | 45.31 ± 18.77 | 50.75 ± 18.88 | 0.104 |
| Myometrial thickness (mm) | 3.07 ± 1.84 | 1.63 ± 0.70 | <0.001 |
| Serum β-hCG concentrations at the time of diagnosis (mIU/mL), n (%) | |||
| ≤5000 | 26 (13.06) | 7 (18.42) | 0.424 |
| >5000 and ≤10,000 | 22 (11.06) | 2 (5.26) | |
| >10,000 | 151 (75.88) | 29 (76.32) | |
| Hemoglobin (g/L) | 124.12 ± 12.52 | 120.64 ± 13.88 | 0.136 |
Data are n, n (%), or mean ± standard deviation.
CS, cesarean scar; MTD, maximum transverse diameter; MLD, maximum longitudinal diameter; hCG, human chorionic gonadotropin.
Comparison of treatment outcomes between the two groups.
| Suction curettage group, n = 199 | Laparoscopic repair group, n = 38 | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operation time (minutes) | 28.84 ± 18.45 | 85.34 ± 47.15 | <0.001 |
| Intraoperative blood loss (mL) | 52.81 ± 107.43 | 303.03 ± 326.89 | <0.001 |
| Duration of hospitalization (days) | 6.09 ± 3.34 | 9.39 ± 3.82 | <0.001 |
| Vaginal bleeding time (days) | 9.17 ± 4.34 | 7.74 ± 4.04 | 0.060 |
| Time to resolution of serum β-hCG (days) | 29.30 ± 9.28 | 20.68 ± 6.51 | <0.001 |
| Time to resolution of the local mass (days) | 91.58 ± 18.90 | 7.63 ± 1.91 | <0.001 |
Data are mean ± standard deviation.
Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis.
| B | Wald | P value | OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gestational age (days) | 0.033 | 8.706 | 0.003 | 1.034 | 1.011–1.057 |
| MTD of the gestational sac (mm) | 0.067 | 6.023 | 0.014 | 1.069 | 1.014–1.127 |
| Myometrial thickness (mm) | −0.923 | 15.658 | <0.001 | 0.397 | 0.252–0.628 |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; MTD, maximum transverse diameter.
Cutoff values of the risk factors for predicting laparoscopic scar defect repair.
| Cutoff | Sensitivity | Specificity | AUC | P value | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gestational age (days) | 50.50 | 0.684 | 0.618 | 0.671 | 0.001 | 0.573–0.769 |
| MTD of the gestational sac (mm) | 20.52 | 0.658 | 0.749 | 0.700 | <0.001 | 0.611–0.790 |
| Myometrial thickness (mm) | 1.95 | 0.678 | 0.763 | 0.762 | <0.001 | 0.693–0.831 |
AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; MTD, maximum transverse diameter.
Figure 3.ROC curve analysis was used to assess risk factors for predicting laparoscopic scar repair, including gestational age, the MTD of the gestational sac, and myometrial thickness. The areas under the curve for gestational age, the MTD of the gestational sac, and myometrial thickness were 0.671, 0.700, and 0.762, respectively.
ROC, receiver operating characteristic; MTD, maximum transverse diameter.
Chi-square test analysis of factors in the two groups.
| Variable | Suction curettage group, n = 199 | Laparoscopic repair group, n = 38 | χ2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gestational age (days) | 11.894 | 0.001 | ||
| <50.5 | 123 | 12 | ||
| ≥50.5 | 76 | 26 | ||
| MTD of the gestational sac (mm) | 24.391 | <0.001 | ||
| <20.5 | 149 | 13 | ||
| ≥20.5 | 50 | 25 | ||
| Myometrial thickness (mm) | 24.427 | <0.001 | ||
| <2 | 71 | 128 | ||
| ≥2 | 30 | 8 | ||
| Serum β-hCG concentration at diagnosis (IU/mL) | 1.715 | 0.424 | ||
| ≤5000 | 26 | 7 | ||
| >5000 and ≤10,000 | 22 | 2 | ||
| >10,000 | 151 | 29 |
MTD, maximum transverse diameter; hCG, human chorionic gonadotropin.