Qiang HUANG, Jinhong XIANG, Li LUO, et al. Evaluation on safety and effectiveness of ultrasonographic scoring system in different treatment methods for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Journal of Third Military Medical University, 2020, 42(21): 2128-2133.
DOI:
Qiang HUANG, Jinhong XIANG, Li LUO, et al. Evaluation on safety and effectiveness of ultrasonographic scoring system in different treatment methods for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Journal of Third Military Medical University, 2020, 42(21): 2128-2133. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.202005293.
Evaluation on safety and effectiveness of ultrasonographic scoring system in different treatment methods for cesarean scar pregnancy
To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of different managements for women with cesarean scar pregnancy based on a ultrasonographic scoring system.
Methods
2
A total of 299 pregnant women with cesarean scar undergoing delivery surgeries in our department from November 2018 to December 2019 were recruited retrospectively. According to the preoperative results of the ultrasonographic scoring system
they were divided into low-risk group (score ≤4) and high-risk group (score > 4). The patients in the low-risk group were treated with ultrasound-guided curettage. And those of the other group were treated with uterine artery embolization and ultrasound-guided curettage. The basic information
perioperative data and postoperative follow-up data of the patients were collected and analyzed.
Results
2
There was no statistical difference in the amount of intraoperative blood loss between the 2 groups (
P
>
0.05)
neither the incidence of secondary uterine artery embolization between them (
P
>
0.05). But significant difference was found in the incidence of secondary laparoscopic procedure for removing scar tissues between the 2 groups (
P
<
0.05). What's more
there were obvious differences in the length of hospital stay and total cost
the time of postoperative serum β-HCG level dropping to normal
the time of disappearance of the abnormal echoes in the lower segment of the uterus
and the restoration of normal menstruation between the 2 groups (
P
<
0.05). However
there was no statistical significance of the outcome of the second pregnancy between them after treatment.
Conclusion
2
According to the preoperative ultrasonographic scoring system for cesarean scar pregnancy
patients in different treatment methods.
关键词
Keywords
references
KIM S Y, YOON S R, KIM M J, et al . Cesarean scar pre-gnancy; Diagnosis and management between 2003 and 2015 in a single center[J ] . Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2018, 57(5): 688-691. DOI:10.1016/j.tjog.2018.08.013.
SUN Q L, LUO L, GAO C Y, et al . Scoring system for the prediction of the successful treatment modality in women with cesarean scar pregnancy[J ] . Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2019, 146(3): 289-295. DOI:10.1002/ijgo.12881.
ASH A, SMITH A, MAXWELL D. Caesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Int J Obstet Gynaecol, 2007, 114(3): 253-263. DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01237.x.
TANAKA K, COGHILL E, BALLARD E, et al . Management of Caesarean scar pregnancy with high dose intravenous metho-trexate infusion therapy: 10-year experience at a single tertiary centre[J ] . Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biol, 2019, 237: 28-32. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.04.008.
MAHEUX-LACROIX S, LI F, BUJOLD E, et al . Cesarean scar pregnancies: a systematic review of treatment options[J ] . J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2017, 24(6): 915-925. DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2017.05.019.
BIRCH PETERSEN K, HOFFMANN E, RIFBJERG LARSEN C, et al . Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies[J ] . Fertil Steril, 2016, 105(4): 958-967. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.12.130.
HARB H M, KNIGHT M, BOTTOMLEY C, et al . Caesarean scar pregnancy in the UK: a national cohort study[J ] . Int J Obstet Gy, 2018, 125(13): 1663-1670. DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.15255.
ZHANG Z Q, HUANG X M, ZHOU X F. Factors related to the amount of intraoperative blood loss in CSP termination surgery[J]. Chin J Pract Gynecol Obstet, 2018, 34(10): 1130-1133. DOI:10.19538/j.fk2018100115.
TIMOR-TRITSCH I E, MONTEAGUDO A. Unforeseen consequences of the increasing rate of cesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A review[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 207(1): 14-29. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.007.
MORRIS C S. Update on uterine artery embolization for symptomatic fibroid disease (uterine artery embolization)[J]. Abdom Imaging, 2008, 33(1): 104-111. DOI:10.1007/s00261-007-9187-3.
CHEN H H, ZHOU J R, WANG H S, et al . The treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy with uterine artery embolization and curettage as compared to transvaginal hysterotomy[J ] . Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2017, 214: 44-49. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.04.032.
MOHAN P P, HAMBLIN M H, VOGELZANG R L. Uterine artery embolization and itseffect on fertility[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2013, 24(7): 925-930. DOI:10.1016/j.jvir.2013.03.014.
XIAO Z N, CHENG D, CHEN J, et al .The effects of metho-trexate and uterine arterial embolization in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy: a retrospective case-control study[J ] . Medicine (Baltimore), 2019, 98(11):e14913. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014913.
CHEN C L, LIU P. Application of vascular interventional therapy in gynecology and obstetrics [J]. Chin J Obstet Gynecol, 2004, 39(2): 138-141. DOI:10.3760/j.issn:0529-567X.2004.02.023.
KRISSI H, HIERSCH L, STOLOVITCH N, et al . Outcome, complications and future fertility in women treated with uterine artery embolization and methotrexate for non-tubal ectopic pregnancy[J ] . Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biol, 2014, 182: 172-176. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.09.026.
STEPNIAK A, PASZKOWSKI T, JARGIEŁŁO T, et al . Effectiveness, complications and reproductive outcome of selective chemoembolization with methotrexate followed by suction curettage for Caesarean scar pregnancy—a prospective observational study[J ] . Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2019, 241: 56-59. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.08.004.
LEVIN G, ZIGRON R, DIOR U P, et al . Conservative management of Caesarean scar pregnancies with systemic multidose methotrexate: predictors of treatment failure and reproductive outcomes[J ] . Reprod Biomed Online, 2019, 39(5): 827-834. DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.05.015.