The Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy with Uterine Artery Embolization and Curettage as Compared to Transvaginal Hysterotomy

Treatments for cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To report the outcome of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) undergoing treatment.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were women with CSP undergoing treatment. The primary outcome was successful treatment for CSP, defined as no need for additional medical or surgical strategies. Secondary outcomes were the type of additional treatment (surgical or medical), need for blood transfusion, emergency laparotomy, hysterectomy, post-treatment complications.All these outcomes were explored in women undergoing single and compound treatments for CSP. Furthermore, we performed a separate sub-group analysis only including studies which reported on the outcomes of elective treatments. Random effects meta-analyses were used to analyze the data and results reported as pooled proportions or odd ratio (OR).

RESULTS

176 studies (13431 women with CSP undergoing treatment) were included.Successful treatment after primary intervention was achieved in 86.2% (95% CI 82.3-89.7) of women with CSP undergoing treatment with ultrasound guided suction curettage, 72.4% (95% CI 64.8-79.3) with systemic MTX, 81.6% (95% CI 72.3-89.3) with local MTX, 83.9% (95% CI 66.7-95.6) with interventional radiology, 90.42% (95% CI 82.9-96.0) with hysteroscopy, 96.1% (95% CI (92.3-98.6) with laparoscopy and 92.6 with high intensity focused ultrasound (95% CI 78.2-99.6). Post-treatments complications were reported in 3.5% (95% CI 1.7-6.0) of women treated with systemic MTX, 5.9% (95% CI 0.8-15.1) with local MTX or KCl, 1.2% (95% CI 0.1-3.5) with interventional radiology, 1.4% (95% CI 0.4-2.9) with hysteroscopy, 5.5% (95% CI 0.4-25.7) with high intensity focused ultrasound and in none of the cases treated with ultrasound guided suction curettage.When considering compound treatments, successful resolution of CSP was achieved in 91.9% (95% CI 88.0-95.10) of women treated with interventional radiology followed by curettage, 83.3% (95% CI 68.8-93.8) with systemic MTX and curettage, 79.4% (95% CI 56.3-95.2) with local MTX and curettage, 96.2% (95% CI 92.3-98.7) with curettage followed by single or double balloon insertion in the uterine cavity, 98.3% (95% CI 95.9-99.7) with high intensity focused ultrasound followed by curettage, 91.1% (95% CI 3.4-97.0) with interventional radiology followed by removal of CSP with hysteroscopy, 64.3% (95% CI 13.8-99.2) with interventional radiology and systemic MTX and in 95.5% (95% CI 92.9-97.5) with curettage and hysteroscopy.When considering studies reporting a comparison between different treatments, there was no difference between systemic vs local MTX in the primary outcome. Curettage was associated with a higher chance of achieving a successful treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A multitude of treatments for CSP have been reported in the published literature. All treatments described for CSP are apparently equally effective in treating this condition. The findings from this systematic review highlight the need for adopting a common definition and outcome reporting of CSP to better elucidate its natural history, estimate the magnitude of maternal complication after treatment and design appropriately powered RCT to elucidate the optimal treatment of CSP according to its ultrasound phenotype and gestational age at treatment, in terms of effective resolution of the condition and risk of post-intervention complications.

Efficacy and safety of treatment modalities for cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Cesarean scar pregnancy may lead to varying degrees of complications. There are many treatment methods for it, but there are no unified or recognized treatment strategies. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to observe the efficacy and safety of treatment modalities for patients with cesarean scar pregnancy.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from their inception to January 31, 2024. In addition, relevant reviews and meta-analyses were manually searched for additional references.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Our study incorporated head-to-head trials involving a minimum of 10 women diagnosed with cesarean scar pregnancy through ultrasound imaging or magnetic resonance imaging, encompassing a detailed depiction of primary interventions and any supplementary measures. Trials with a Newcastle-Ottawa scale score <4 were excluded because of their low quality.

METHODS

We conducted a random-effects network meta-analysis and review for cesarean scar pregnancy. Group-level data on treatment efficacy and safety, reproductive outcomes, study design, and demographic characteristics were extracted following a predefined protocol. The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle‒Ottawa scale for cohort studies and case series. The main outcomes were efficacy (initial treatment success) and safety (complications), of which summary odds ratios and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Seventy-three trials (7 randomized controlled trials) assessing a total of 8369 women and 17 treatment modalities were included. Network meta-analyses were rooted in data from 73 trials that reported success rates and 55 trials that reported complications. The findings indicate that laparoscopy, transvaginal resection, hysteroscopic curettage, and high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage demonstrated the highest cure rates, as evidenced by surface under the cumulative ranking curve rankings of 91.2, 88.2, 86.9, and 75.3, respectively. When compared with suction curettage, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for efficacy were as follows: 6.76 (1.99-23.01) for laparoscopy, 5.92 (1.47-23.78) for transvaginal resection, 5.00 (1.99-23.78) for hysteroscopic curettage, and 3.27 (1.08-9.89) for high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage. Complications were more likely to occur after receiving uterine artery chemoembolization, suction curettage, methotrexate+hysteroscopic curettage, and systemic methotrexate; hysteroscopic curettage, high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage, and Lap were safer than the other options derived from finite evidence; and the confidence intervals of all the data were wide.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that laparoscopy, transvaginal resection, hysteroscopic curettage, and high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage procedures exhibit superior efficacy with reduced complications. The utilization of methotrexate (both locally guided injection and systemic administration) as a standalone medical treatment is not recommended.

Other treatments for CSP

Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is an increasingly common clinical conundrum. The non-curettage surgical management of CSP can be categorised into hysteroscopic, vaginal, laparoscopic, and open removal modalities and the choice of treatment is surgeon-dependent. A systematic review of original studies reporting surgical treatment outcomes of CSP until March 2023 was conducted to evaluate the non-curettage surgical management of this highly morbid condition. A total of 60 studies of mostly weak methodological quality were identified involving 6720 CSP cases. Success rates were generally high across all treatment modalities although highest in vaginal and laparoscopic excisional approaches. Morbidity was most associated with haemorrhage although unplanned hysterectomy rates remained low across all treatment groups. Subsequent pregnancies are associated with morbidity despite being underreported and the impact of CSP treatment on future pregnancy is poorly understood. Substantive study heterogeneity precludes meta-analyses of pooled data and treatment superiority has not been demonstrated.

Treatment of Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy in China with Uterine Artery Embolization-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy (CSP) is a rare form of ectopic pregnancy, and treatment of CSP with uterine artery embolization (UAE) is a novel approach. With increasing numbers of cesarean sections being performed annually, the incidence of this condition is likely to increase. The authors became aware of an unusually high number of published studies originating in mainland China regarding this unusual treatment and sought to perform a meta-analysis to provide comprehensive evidence on this novel practice.

METHODS

We performed a thorough search and included all forms of quality studies on this topic that reported UAE as a part of first-line management of CSP. We included only studies originating in China. Ultimately, 37 studies were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis of evidence. After screening retrieved records and extracting data from eligible studies, we pooled continuous data as a mean estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI), and dichotomous data as proportion and 95% CI.

RESULTS

CSP patients treated with protocols including UAE had a mean time of 30 days for serum β-hCG normalization, 95% CI [26.816, 33.881]. They had a mean estimated intraprocedural blood loss of 4.19 ± 3.76 mL, a mean hospital stay of nine days, 95%CI [7.914, 9.876], and a success rate of 93.4%, 95%CI [0.918, 0.951]. The severe complication rate was 1.2%, 95%CI [0.008, 0.017].

CONCLUSION

UAE, in combination with other procedures is being used effectively for the treatment of CSP in China. Protocols including UAE have a success rate of approximately 93.4%, and a severe complication rate of approximately 1.2%. This data's utility is limited by vast differences in the studied protocols and questionable feasibility outside of China.

Experience in management of cesarean scar pregnancy and outcomes in a single center

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe our experience of managing cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and outcomes depending on ultrasound imaging features.

METHODS

A retrospective, cohort observational study was performed on 31 consecutive patients with CSP at 6 to 9 weeks of gestation from April 2015 to January 2021. All patients were evaluated for the residual myometrial thickness (RMT), growth direction of the gestational sac (GS), blood flow, and chorionic parenchyma using ultrasonography. Patients underwent curettage or methotrexate (MTX) combined with curettage in CSP depending on the age of the GS. Blood loss of >500 mL with curettage was considered major bleeding.

RESULTS

Twenty-five (80.6%) patients had successful treatment, and six (19.4%) patients had major bleeding. The incidence of major bleeding was significantly higher in patients with >7 weeks of gestation, types II and III CSP, mixed and exogenous types of the growth direction of the GS, an RMT < 2 mm, and multiple lacunae formation in thickened chorionic parenchyma.

CONCLUSIONS

The exogenous and mixed types of the GS, an RMT < 2 mm, and multiple lacunae in thickened chorionic parenchyma may be high-risk factors for major hemorrhage by curettage in CSP.

Uterine artery embolization combined with ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy: Efficacy and 5–8-year follow-up study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with dilation and curettage (D&C) using ultrasound as a treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and assess its effect on ovarian and reproductive function.

Methods

A total of 54 patients with uterine CSP between January 2011 and December 2015 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were treated with UAE combined with D&C using ultrasound for the treatment of CSP and followed up for 5–8 years. Their medical records, medical histories, clinical manifestations, treatment courses, and treatment results were analyzed.

Results

The 54 patients were initially treated without severe complications. β-Human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) normalization took 36.11 ​± ​10.73 days (range, 25–84 days), length of hospitalization was 6.6 ​± ​1.5 days (range, 4–10 days), and total blood loss was 18.48 ​± ​8.41 ​mL (range, 5–33 ​mL). All patients resumed normal menstruation after 33.48 ​± ​8.71 days (range, 26–70 days). At the 5–8-year follow-up after UAE combined with D&C by ultrasound for the treatment of uterine CSP, the menstrual volume in 32 (59.3%) patients decreased versus before the operation. Compared with pretreatment, the menstrual cycle was prolonged in two (3.7%) cases, shortened in 10 (18.5%) cases, irregular in one (1.9%) case, and unchanged in 39 (72.2%) cases. Three patients conceived naturally and successfully gave birth to healthy children. Seven (12.96%) patients with accidental natural pregnancies chose induced abortion with no significant change in their sex lives.

Conclusion

UAE combined with D&C using ultrasound for the treatment of uterine CSP is safe and effective and may not affect the fertility of patients aged <40 years. However, menstrual volume may be reduced in some patients.

Comparison of D&C and hysteroscopy after UAE in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy: A case-control study

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) stands for the severe complication secondary to cesarean section, and its incidence shows an increasing trend recently. However, no consensus has been reached about the CSP treatment. This study aims to explore the necessity of hysteroscopy (H/S) after preventive uterine artery embolization (UAE).A case-control report. The childbearing CSP patients with a cesarean section history were evaluated by ultrasonography, with a gestational age of less than 10 weeks. Thirty-four patients receiving dilation and curettage (D&C) after UAE were enrolled into the D&C group, whereas 46 undergoing H/S and curettage after UAE were enrolled into the H/S group.Differences in success rate and decrease in the β-hCG level in serum on the second day of surgery were not significantly different between D&C and H/S groups (P > .05). Also, differences in side effect rate (except for the anesthesia-related side effects), intraoperative blood loss amount, postoperative bleeding time, and total length of hospital stay were not significant between 2 groups (P > .05). Compared with D&C group, H/S group had decreased postoperative length of hospital stay (P < .05), increased hospitalization cost (P < .05), and significantly elevated time of CSP mass disappearance (P < .05). In addition, 8 (18.19%) patients in H/S group developed anesthesia-related side effects.This study reveals no obvious difference between UAE + D&C and UAE + H/S in terms of the clinical efficacy and safety, except for the time of CSP mass disappearance and anesthesia-related side effects. The hospitalization cost is more expensive for UAE + H/S, but the postoperative length of stay is shorter for UAE + H/S. UAE + H/S is associated with the risk of anesthesia-associated side effects.

When to perform curettage after uterine artery embolization for cesarean scar pregnancy: a clinical study

Background

Prophylactic uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with subsequent curettage is suggested as an effective and minimally invasive treatment strategy for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) with a high bleeding risk. However, the timing of curettage after UAE remains to be studied. Thus, we aimed to identify the optimal time interval to perform curettage after UAE in patients with CSP.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a large medical center for women and children in Southwest China. CSP patients treated by UAE combined with subsequent curettage were included and grouped by the treatment time interval between these two procedures. The clinical outcomes among arms were compared by univariate and multivariable analysis.

Results

Our study included 314 CSP patients who received this combination treatment in our department from January 2014 to December 2019. The median time interval between UAE and curettage was 48 h, with a range of 12-168 h among all participants. Thirty-two patients (10.2%) experienced intraoperative hemorrhage (blood loss ≥200 mL). Intrauterine balloon tamponade was used in 17 cases (5.4%). In 14 cases (4.5%), the procedure was converted to laparoscopy (or laparotomy). In the cohort study, patients with longer treatment intervals had more intraoperative blood loss and a higher incidence of complications than those with shorter intervals (P < 0.05). The rates of intraoperative bleeding were 5.0% for patients who received curettage within 24 h after UAE (Arm 1) and 19.4% for those who had a treatment interval longer than 72 h (Arm 4). In the multivariable logistic regression model of bleeding, a treatment interval > 72 h had an adjusted odds ratio of 3.37 (95% confidence interval: 1.40-8.09).

Conclusion

We suggest that curettage not be delayed longer than 72 h after UAE in this combined treatment of CSP.

Is suction curettage an effective treatment alternative for cesarean scar pregnancies?

OBJECTIVES

The study aims to evaluate the success rate of suction curettage (SC) as a first line treatment with or without use of foley balloon tamponade for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and to determine the risk factors for failure of treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

The study was retrospective and included 36 CSP cases who underwent SC for treatment. Presence of pain with active bleeding and > 10 weeks of gestation were taken as the exclusion criterion. The procedure was performed under sonographic guidance. After the procedure, in patients who had a hemorrhage foley catheter was inserted into the uterine cavity. SC failure was defined as a requirement of secondary intervention. CSP types, myometrial thickness in the scar area, fetal cardiac activity, initial Beta human chorionic gonadotropin levels (β-HCG), history of vaginal delivery were compared between successful and failed groups.

RESULT

Of 36 patients, 31 had favorable results with SC ± foley balloon tamponade. Success rate was found to be 86 % (31/36) as the first line therapy. Foley catheter was applied for 23 patients, among them, four were in the failed group and 19 were in the favorable group. In the failed group, two patients had emergent laparotomy, two had repeat SC the day after the initial treatment and one patient was treated with systemic MTX. Fetal cardiac activity and presence of embryonic pole were not different between the groups (p = 1.000, p = 0.829 respectively). Myometrial thickness in the failed group was less than the successful group, this difference was significant (p = 0.033). CSP types, initial β-HCG levels and history of vaginal delivery were not different between the groups (p = 0.149, p = 0.372 and p = 0.404 respectively).

CONCLUSION

SC may be considered as a first line therapy for CSPs, and and in patients complicated with hemorrhage foley balloon tamponade can be used easily. Thinner myometrium at previous cesarean scar can be considered as a risk factor for failure of SC in patients with CSP.

Type II caesarean scar pregnancy management by ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection in combination with suction curettage: A case report

INTRODUCTION

The implantation of a gestational sac within the scar of a previous caesarean delivery is defined as caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), which is classified into two types: CSP I and CSP II. CSP II is life threatening, and no clear consensus for CSP II management exists.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 31-year-old woman, gravida 1, para 1, with a previous caesarean delivery due to macrosomia, presented with an estimated 45 days of amenorrhea. The patient presented to the emergency department with vaginal bleeding for 1 day and no abdominal pain.

DIAGNOSES

An ultrasound examination was performed demonstrating a viable fetus that was embedded in the caesarean scar area and was bulging through the wall of the uterus into the bladder without contact with the uterine cavity or cervical canal. A diagnosis of type II caesarean scar pregnancy was made.

INTERVENTIONS

Local lauromacrogol was used to reduce the gestational sac blood supply. Suction curettage was performed under the guidance of abdominal ultrasound 24 h later, and the amount of bleeding was 20 mL. The response to the treatment was monitored by serial beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG).

OUTCOMES

Patient was followed up with β-hCG weekly levels which became <10 mIU/mL after 4 weeks of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with suction curettage may be a safer and novel therapeutic method.

Scoring system for the prediction of the successful treatment modality in women with cesarean scar pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To establish a risk scoring system to predict the successful treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted between June 2016 and March 2018 in a tertiary care center. Patients received evacuation followed by uterine artery embolization and laparoscopic local resection/hysterectomy successively as salvage measures if necessary. Optimal scaling regression determined the extent of each potential prognostic factor predicted.

RESULTS

Out of 228 women, 144 cases required evacuation before recovery, 73 women required uterine artery embolization, and 11 women eventually required laparoscopic surgery. Six variables were included in the predictive model: number of cesarean deliveries; maximal diameter of gestational sac; remnant myometrial thickness; grading of Doppler signals; presence of fetal heartbeat; and location of gestational sac. A 10-point scoring system was established by weighting their prediction of the method of successful treatment. In the risk score rank of 1-4, only 4 (2.8%) out of 142 women needed uterine artery embolization as a salvage treatment, while in the risk score rank of 8-10, 41 (80.4%) cases needed uterine artery embolization; laparoscopic operations were performed by physicians for the other 10 (19.6%) cases.

CONCLUSION

The successful treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy was accurately predicted by a 10-point scoring system.

CHINESE CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY

ChiCTR-OOC-16008467.

Indwelling Intrauterine Foley Balloon Catheter for Intraoperative and Postoperative Bleeding in Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a rare type of ectopic pregnancy, and a significant concern in the management of this condition is the control and prevention of bleeding. We aimed to determine the efficacy and value of an indwelling, intrauterine Foley balloon catheter in controlling and preventing intraoperative and postoperative bleeding in patients with CSP.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

University-affiliated hospital.

PATIENTS

Between January 1, 2015 and May 31, 2017, 70 patients presented with CSP.

INTERVENTIONS

All patients underwent uterine curettage under hysteroscopic guidance and ultrasound monitoring. Patients were then assigned to 2 groups: the study group, with an indwelling Foley balloon catheter placed in the uterine cavity during surgery and retained for 24 to 48 hours, and the control group, without catheter placement. Data were collected to compare the 2 groups in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical time, and status of menstruation resumption.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The average daily volume of postoperative blood loss during the first 3 postoperative days in the study group was 23.1 mL compared with 31.5 mL observed in the control group (p = .041). Moreover, the study group had significantly shorter average duration of bleeding (p = .027) and fewer menstruation abnormalities than the control group. Uterine ultrasonography performed after resumption of menstruation showed that none of the enrolled patients had any intrauterine abnormalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an indwelling, intrauterine Foley balloon catheter has positive results in the management of CSP.

Prophylactic uterine artery embolization in second-trimester pregnancy termination with complete placenta previa

Objective

This study was performed to assess whether prophylactic uterine artery embolization (UAE) is beneficial for second-trimester abortion with complete placenta previa (CPP).

Methods

Patients with CPP who underwent second-trimester pregnancy termination by labor induction with or without UAE from January 2010 to January 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. In total, 25 patients were eligible for analysis. The primary outcomes were the abortion success rate and bleeding volume, and the secondary outcomes were the induction-to-abortion time, length of hospital stay, and complications.

Results

CPP occurred in all 25 patients. Fifteen patients underwent prophylactic UAE (UAE group) and 10 did not (control group). Abortion was successful in 13 of 15 (86.7%) women in the UAE group and in 9 of 10 (90.0%) women in the control group. There was no significant difference in the bleeding volume or induction-to-abortion time between the two groups. The hospital stay was longer and pyrexia was more common in the UAE than control group.

Conclusion

Prophylactic UAE did not markedly improve the outcomes of second-trimester abortion in patients with CPP. Conversely, it may increase the risk of complications and prolong the hospital stay.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE) versus Laparoscopic Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Debridement Surgery (LCSPDS) in Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

Background

The present study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of uterine artery embolization (UAE) vs. laparoscopic cesarean scar pregnancy debridement surgery (LCSPDS) in the treatment of patients with cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

Material/Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 87 CSP patients from March 2012 to February 2017. For the included 87 cases, 51 were treated with UAE and 36 were treated with LCSPDS. The operation success rate, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, length of hospital stay, perioperative complications, and β-HCG level were compared.

Results

For the UAE group, 41 patients underwent successful surgeries (80.4% success rate), and 36 cases in the LCSPDS group were successfully treated, with no case of perioperative death. In the UAE group, the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 82.23±45.21 min, 112.58±68.54 mL, and 12.56±3.03 days, respectively. In the LCSPDS group, the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 85.45±30.02 min, 108.56±54.12 mL and 7.65±2.48 days, respectively. The length of hospital stay for the UAE group was significantly longer than in the LCSPDS group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

UAE and LCSPDS each have their own advantages and disadvantages in treating CSP. Thus, appropriate individualized surgical programs based on specific patient circumstances are needed to avoid indiscriminately performing complete uterine cavity curettage.

Uterine Artery Embolization Combined with Dilation and Curettage for the Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: Efficacy and Future Fertility

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of uterine artery embolization (UAE) followed by dilation and curettage (D&C) as a treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and to assess pregnancy outcomes after the treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 33 CSP patients treated with UAE followed by D&C. The serum level of beta human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) normalization, hospitalization, menstruation, and successful pregnancy after treatment was assessed as clinical and pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients were initially treated without severe complications. However, four patients required additional systemic chemotherapy. β-hCG normalization took 35.5 ± 14.9 days (range 13-79), and the hospitalization was 6.5 ± 2.5 days (2-15). All patients resumed normal menstruation after 36 ± 19.2 days (12-86). Of 16 of 33 patients who desired pregnancy after the treatment, seven patients (43.8%) had uneventful parturition.

CONCLUSIONS

UAE combined with D&C was efficient and safe for CSP management. This minimally invasive procedure may be considered as one of the treatment options which enable preservation of fertility after treatment.

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Local Lauromacrogol Injection Combined with Aspiration for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Novel Treatment

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with aspiration for treating cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

METHODS

From July 2016 to December 2016, 18 patients diagnosed with CSP were treated with ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with aspiration. Clinical data and outcome were analysed.

RESULTS

All patients were treated successfully. The amount of bleeding ranged between 10 and 50 mL. The duration of hospitalization ranged between 2 and 11 days. Serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) decreased to the nondetectable level within 19-41 days. Menstruation recovery occurred after 10-24 days of normalization of serum β-hCG level. Reproductive functions were preserved, and there were no untoward effects or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with aspiration is an effective CSP therapy, as it was associated with a high success rate, short hospitalization and fast recovery. However, its wider application and popularization have to be validated on a larger patient population affected by CSP.