Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies in patients following treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy with high intensity focused ultrasound followed by ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage

Cesarean section diverticulum area predicting the intraoperative hemorrhage at suction curettage for cesarean scar pregnancy after focused ultrasound ablation surgery

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the significance of the cesarean section diverticulum (CSD) area for predicting the intraoperative massive hemorrhage during suction curettage for cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) after focused ultrasound ablation surgery (FUAS).

METHODS

Data from 90 patients undergoing suction curettage after FUAS were collected. According to their intraoperative bleeding volume, patients were categorized into three groups: Group 1 (n = 71, <200 mL), Group 2 (n = 9, 200-300 mL) and Group 3 (n = 10, ≥300 mL). Multiple liner regression analysis was performed to identify the influencing factors for CSD area and intraoperative blood loss. The ROC curve was plotted to identify the optimal cutoff values.

RESULTS

The median CSD area size in Group 3 (336.8 mm2) was significantly greater than in Groups 1 (128.6 mm2) and 2 (121.6 mm2) (p < .05). Using multiple linear regression analysis, CSD area was associated with intraoperative blood loss (p < .05). The optimal cutoff CSD areas for predicting intraoperative massive hemorrhage volumes ≥ 200 mL and ≥ 300 mL were 202.05 mm2 and 241.90 mm2, respectively. The mean gestational sac diameter and preoperative symptoms (+) were positively related to CSD area, while residual myometrial thickness was negatively correlated with the CSD area. CSD area showed the greatest relationship to sonication time (rs = 0.42), treatment time (rs = 0.316) and total energy used for ablation (rs = 0.415).

CONCLUSION

The preoperative CSD area could predict intraoperative massive hemorrhage during suction curettage after FUAS, which might inform therapy strategies for CSP patients.

Reproductive outcomes in women with prior cesarean scar pregnancies over six years

To explore the impact of two surgical methods, ultrasound-guided vacuum aspiration and laparoscopic scar resection with repair on the reproductive outcomes of patients with caesarean scar pregnancy. We systematically selected 562 women who had undergone surgical treatment for caesarean scar pregnancies at a tertiary hospital in China between May 2017 and July 2022. After 6 years of follow-up, the reproductive outcomes of 100 women who desired future pregnancies were ultimately tracked. We retrospectively analysed the clinical data and follow-up records of these women to explore the impact of the two surgical methods on their reproductive outcomes. Among those 100 patients, 43(43%) live births, 19(19%) miscarriages, 15(15%) RCSP, and 38 (38%) cases of secondary infertility. Comparison of the clinical data between the ultrasound-guided vacuum aspiration and laparoscopic scar resection with repair groups showed that patients in the latter had longer hospital stays, higher gestational age at treatment, greater maximum GS diameter, and lower BMI (P < 0.05). Women with thicker myometrial layers at the caesarean scar site were more likely to have live births in subsequent pregnancies (P = 0.044; HR 1.207; 95% CI 1.001-1.909). Older women were at higher risk of miscarriage and recurrent caesarean scar pregnancies (P = 0.028; HR 1.868; 95% CI 1.765-1.985).The reproductive outcomes of women with caesarean scar pregnancies after surgical treatment are optimistic.The reproductive outcomes were not dependent on the type of surgical methods used, either ultrasound-guided vacuum aspiration or laparoscopic scar resection with repair for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy. Advancing maternal age in subsequent pregnancies is a risk factor for adverse reproductive outcomes and warrants attention.

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.

Surgical treatment and reproductive outcomes in caesarean scar pregnancy at a single center

BACKGROUND

To investigate factors associated with different reproductive outcomes in patients with Caesarean scar pregnancies (CSPs).

METHODS

Between May 2017 and July 2022, 549 patients underwent ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration and laparoscopic scar repair at the Gynaecology Department of Hubei Maternal and Child Health Hospital. Ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration was performed in patients with type I and II CSPs, and laparoscopic scar repair was performed in patients with type III CSP. The reproductive outcomes of 100 patients with fertility needs were followed up and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Of 100 patients, 43% had live births (43/100), 19% had abortions (19/100), 38% had secondary infertility (38/100), 15% had recurrent CSPs (RCSPs) (15/100). The reproductive outcomes of patients with CSPs after surgical treatment were not correlated with age, body mass index, time of gestation, yields, abortions, Caesarean sections, length of hospital stay, weeks of menopause during treatment, maximum diameter of the gestational sac, thickness of the remaining muscle layer of the uterine scar, type of CSP, surgical method, uterine artery embolisation during treatment, major bleeding, or presence of uterine adhesions after surgery. Abortion after treatment was the only risk factor affecting RCSPs (odds ratio 11.25, 95% confidence interval, 3.302-38.325; P < 0.01) and it had a certain predictive value for RCSP occurrence (area under the curve, 0.741).

CONCLUSIONS

The recurrence probability of CSPs was low, and women with childbearing intentions after CSPs should be encouraged to become pregnant again. Abortion after CSP is a risk factor for RCSP. No significant difference in reproductive outcomes was observed between the patients who underwent ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration and those who underwent laparoscopic scar repair for CSP.

Efficacy and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) presents a significant clinical challenge owing to the associated risks of uterine scar rupture, severe haemorrhage and adverse maternal outcomes. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of combining high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) with suction curettage for treating CSP.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in four databases, namely PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library, to identify published studies evaluating the use of HIFU combined with suction curettage to treat CSP. Intraoperative blood loss, treatment success rate, and reproductive results were the primary outcomes assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies involving 1251 patients with CSP, all of whom received preoperative HIFU therapy were included. The average hospital stay was 6.22 days, the intraoperative blood loss was 26.29 ml and the incidence of adverse events was 15.60%, including abdominal or lower limb pain, fever, vaginal bleeding, haematuria and vomiting. Furthermore, post-treatment follow-up showed that serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin levels were rapidly normalized (average of 25.48 days) and menstruation returned (average of 33.03 days). The treatment had a remarkable success rate of 97.60% and a subsequent pregnancy rate of 68.70%.

CONCLUSION

While the combination of HIFU and suction-curettage may induce common adverse effects such as lower abdominal or limb pain, these reactions typically do not necessitate therapeutic intervention. Additionally, the size of the gestational sac is a determinant of the procedure's success. In conclusion, HIFU combined with suction curettage demonstrates promising clinical efficacy, safety and favourable reproductive outcomes in managing CSP.

Association of menstrual blood volume and reproductive outcomes in patients with caesarean scar pregnancy managed using uterine artery embolization and curettage

This study aimed to assess the association of menstrual blood volumes (MBV) and reproductive outcomes in patients after uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with curettage for caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). This retrospective observational study enrolled women who underwent UAE plus curettage for CSP at the Interventional Department of Henan Provincial People's Hospital between December 2012 and December 2017. The primary outcome was pregnancy rate and the secondary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR) and interpregnancy interval. This study finally included 37 women (16 women with normal MBV and 21 women with decreased MBV) with pregnancy intention after UAE plus curettage for CSP. The pregnancy rate in women with normal MBV was higher than those with decreased MBV (81.3% vs. 47.6%; P = 0.048). There were no differences between the two groups regarding the interpregnancy interval (18.4 ± 8.7 vs. 22.2 ± 10.0 months, P = 0.233), and LBR (63% vs. 38%, P = 0.191). In conclusion, Women with normal MBV after UAE combined with curettage for CSP management might have a higher pregnancy rate compared with patients with decreased MBV, but there were no differences in LBR between the two groups.

Efficacy and Safety of High-intensity Focused Ultrasound Compared with Uterine Artery Embolization in Cesarean Section Pregnancy: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) compared with uterine artery embolization (UAE) in cesarean section pregnancy (CSP) and to calculate the success rate of HIFU.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase on September 30, 2022, and the related studies were independently reviewed by 2 researchers.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Medical subject headings and relevant terms from other articles were used for the database search. Patients with CSP who underwent HIFU were included in this analysis. The following results were recorded: success rate, intraoperative blood loss, time for serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-HCG) normalization and menstruation recovery, adverse events, hospitalization time, and hospitalization expenses. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scoring system and the methodological index for nonrandomized studies system to evaluate the quality of the studies.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Data from 6 studies were used to compare the efficacy and safety of UAE and HIFU. We pooled the success rate of HIFU by including 10 studies. No data overlap between the 10 studies. Success rate was higher in the HIFU group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-3.41; p = .03; I2 = 0). We performed the meta-analysis of single rate in R 4.2.0 software, and the success rate of HIFU group was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96; p = .04; I2 = 48%). Intraoperative blood loss (mean difference [MD]= -21.94 mL; 95% CI -67.34 to 23.47; p = .34; I2 = 99%) and time for serum beta-HCG normalization (MD = 3.13 days; 95% CI 0.02-6.25; p = .05; I2 = 70%) were not significantly different. Time to menstruation recovery (MD = 2.72 days; 95% CI 1.32-4.12; p = .0001; I2 = 0) in the UAE group was shorter than that in the HIFU group. Adverse events were not significantly different between the 2 groups (OR = 0.53; 95% CI 0.22-1.29; p = .16; I2 = 81%). Hospitalization time was not significantly different between the HIFU and UAE groups (MD = -0.41 days; 95% CI -1.14 to 0.31; p = .26; I2 = 55%). Hospitalization expenses of the HIFU group were lower than those of the UAE group (MD = -7488.49 yuan; 95% CI -8460.13 to -6516.84; p <.000; I2 = 0). Heterogeneity of the time for beta-HCG normalization, adverse events, and hospitalization time were improved after excluding one study, and HIFU showed better results in the sensitivity analysis of adverse events and hospitalization time.

CONCLUSION

According to our analysis, HIFU demonstrated satisfactory treatment success, accompanied by similar intraoperative blood loss, slower normalization of beta-HCG levels, and menstruation recovery, but potentially shorter hospitalization time, lower adverse events and lower costs than UAE. Therefore, HIFU is an effective, safe, and economical treatment for patients with CSP. These conclusions should be interpreted with caution because of the significant heterogeneity. However, large and strictly designed clinical trials are required to verify these conclusions.

Subsequent fertility after cesarean scar pregnancy: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) refers to the implantation and growth of the gestational sac at a uterine scarring site due to a previous cesarean section. The effects of CSP on subsequent fertility have emerged as a clinical issue of importance in gynecology and obstetrics in China owing to the increasing rate of cesarean section over the past 30 years in combination with the abolition of the national family planning policy, allowing for subsequent pregnancies. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effects of CSP treatment on subsequent fertility and pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

The study consecutively enrolled 499 women treated for CSP at Taizhou Hospital between January 2009 and December 2018. The study outcomes were the rate of secondary infertility and pregnancy outcomes. Clinical information was collected at the time of admission for CSP treatment. Information on subsequent fertility and pregnancy outcomes was collected via telephonic follow-up.

RESULTS

Among the 499 women who met the inclusion criteria for CSP, 48 were lost to follow-up. Most women (74.9%, 338/451) did not express the desire for a subsequent pregnancy after CSP treatment. Among the 113 women who initially desired a subsequent pregnancy, 62 finally abandoned fertility plans. Among the 51 women who pursued pregnancy, 48 pregnancies were recorded in 43 women, infertility secondary to CSP treatment was identified in 15.7% (8/51) of women, and 60.8% (31/51) of women achieved full-term pregnancy, with placenta accreta spectrum identified in two women, one requiring a hysterectomy during cesarean section due to massive bleeding. Among the 16 women treated with uterine artery embolization combined with uterine aspiration and 18 women treated by ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with uterine aspiration, a successful full-term pregnancy rate of 68.8% (11/16) and 88.9% (16/18), respectively, was achieved. There were five cases of recurrent CSP among all 76 pregnancies (6.6%).

CONCLUSION

Over a long-term follow-up of women after CSP treatment, a high successful fertility rate was identified, with also an increased CSP recurrence rate. Uterine artery embolization combined with uterine aspiration and ultrasound-guided local lauromacrogol injection combined with uterine aspiration showed high rates of successful post-treatment fertility and pregnancy.

The effectiveness of single ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) ablation in managing placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorder

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of single ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) ablation in managing placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorder.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 40 PAS patients between April 2017 and October 2021. All the patients received one session of HIFU treatment. Regular follow-up was done after HIFU treatment until normal menstruation returned and placental tissue disappeared. The patient's reproductive-related outcomes were obtained through telephone interviews.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time for the 40 patients was 30.50 (15.75-44.00) months and the mean placental tissue elimination time was 45.29 ± 33.32 days. The mean duration of bloody lochia was 13.43 ± 10.01 days, with no incidences of severe bleeding. Notably, Linear regression analysis showed that the residual placenta volume before HIFU was a factor affecting the duration of bloody lochia after HIFU (R2 = 0.284, B = 0.062, P = 0.000). The normal menstrual return time was 58.71 ± 31.14 days. One (2.50%) patient developed an infection. Two (5.00%) patients were subjected to ultrasound-guided suction curettage for persistent vaginal discharge for more than one month without infection. Notably, 7 of the 18 patients who expressed reproductive plans became pregnant during the 4 to 53 months of follow-up without placental abnormalities. The remaining 11 patients were on contraceptives.

CONCLUSIONS

Single HIFU is an effective treatment option for managing PAS. However, future studies on further treatment strategies to reduce complications and promote patient recovery after HIFU ablation are desirable.

Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation (HIFU-a) or uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage (USg-D&C) was effective. However, there is insufficient comparative research evidence on clinical efficacy and subsequent pregnancy outcomes after previous CSP treatment. This study aims to investigate the efficacy, safety, and subsequent pregnancy outcomes of HIFU-a compared to UAE before USg-D&C for the treatment of CSP.

METHODS

Between January 2016 and July 2020, a total of 272 patients received the pretreatment with HIFU-a or UAE(HIFU-a group: n = 118; UAE group: n = 154). The clinical characteristics, treatment success rate, postoperative pregnancy rate and outcome of the two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. After pretreatment, the adverse events rate of HIFU-a group was lower than that of UAE group (10.40% (16/154) vs. 40.70% (48/118), P = 0.00). All patients received the USg-D&C. The HIFU-a group was of less intraoperative blood loss (10.00 (5.00-20.00) vs. 12.50 (5.00-30.00) ml, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in success rates. However, the HIFU-a group was of a shorter duration of postoperative vaginal bleeding (12.00 (9.00-13.00) vs. 14.00 (12.00-15.00) days, P = 0.00). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of subsequent pregnancy rates (P = 0.317). However, the recurrent CSP (rCSP) rate in the HIFU-a group was lower than that in the UAE group (7.70% (6/78) vs. 19.70%(13/66), P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

CSP treated with either HIFU-a or UAE combined with USg-D&C was safe and effective. Although no significant difference was found in the subsequent pregnancy outcomes of the two groups, the rCSP was more common in the UAE group. So, we recommend HIFU-a combined with USg-D&C treatment modality.

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

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Analysis of pregnancy outcomes following surgical treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy

Purpose

To investigate the surgical treatment approaches for patients with Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and the effects on subsequent pregnancy.

Methods

CSP patients admitted to Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University from January 2013 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed to collect their clinical characteristics, and follow-up of postoperative pregnancies.

Results

A total of 1126 CSP patients were enrolled in this study, including 595 (52.84%) CSP type I, 415 (36.86%) CSP type II, and 116 (10.30%) CSP type III cases. There were significant differences between the three types of patients in terms of β-HCG levels, gestational sac diameter, clinical symptoms and presence of fetal heartbeat at diagnosis (P < 0.01). Among these, 89.90% of CSP type I, 88.90% of CSP type II and 50% of CSP type III patients were treated with hysteroscopic lesion excision, 7.9% of CSP type I and 2.2% of CSP type II patients underwent ultrasound-monitored curettage, and the remaining patients underwent lesion excision and and simultaneous repair of excised lesions by different routes (trans-laparoscopic, transabdominal or transvaginal methods). And 5.55% of CSP type I, 22.65% of CSP type II and 43.10% of CSP type III patients were treated with adjunctive uterine artery embolization (UAE). The patients were followed up for more than 2 years after surgery. Among the 166 re-pregnancies, 58 (34.94%) were normal pregnancies, 17 patients reoccurred with CSP, the recurrent rate of CSP was 10.24%. All 58 normal pregnancies were terminated by cesarean section, with a mean gestational week of delivery of (38.36 ± 2.25) weeks, a mean birth weight of (3228.45 ± 301.96)g, and the postnatal Apgar score was (9.86 ± 0.23) points at 1 min and all 5 min were 10 points. Logistic regression analysis suggested that the number of previous cesarean deliveries was a risk factor for recurrent CSP (RCSP) (OR = 10.82, 95% CI: 2.52–46.50, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

The type of CSP is related to β-HCG values, presence of fetal heartbeat, gestational sac diameter and clinical symptoms. Hysteroscopic therapy is a commonly used surgical procedure and UAE is often used as an adjuvant treatment. For subsequent pregnancies, the number of previous cesarean deliveries is a risk factor for recurrent CSP.

Evaluation of the treatment of high intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage for exogenous cesarean scar pregnancy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) combined with suction curettage in the treatment of exogenous cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

METHODS

A retrospective single-center observational study was conducted. A total of 41 patients diagnosed with exogenous CSP were enrolled in this study. All patients received HIFU combined with suction curettage.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were administered one session of HIFU ablation. In addition, the other 12 patients received 2 HIFU sessions. Suction curettage was performed in all patients after HIFU, and no patient was converted to laparoscopy or hysterectomy. The mean blood loss during suction curettage was 99 ml. Three patients received two sessions of suction curettage. The success rate of our study was 92.68%. The mean time for serum β-HCG normalization was 23.18 ± 3.13 days. The average menstruation recovery time was 29.38 ± 3.34 days. Based on the blood loss during suction curettage, 41 patients were divided into a bleeding group and a control group. The size of the gestational sac in the bleeding group (3.80 ± 0.87 cm) was larger than that in the control group (3.39 ± 0.77 cm) (P < 0.05). The thickness of the myometrium between the bladder and gestational sac in the bleeding group (2.37 ± 0.89 mm) was less than that in the control group (2.75 ± 0.75 mm) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results suggested that HIFU combined with suction curettage could be considered an effective treatment for exogenous CSP of < 9 weeks. The size of the gestational sac and the thickness of the myometrium between the bladder and gestational sac might be high-risk factors for blood loss during this treatment.

The effect of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy on ovarian reserve

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels after ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

METHODS

A retrospective case series study was conducted in the Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College. Thirty-two women with cesarean scar pregnancy who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study between January 2018 and December 2019. All patients underwent USgHIFU treatment with or without suction curettage. Intraoperative blood loss in suction curettage and hysteroscopy procedures, time to return of β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) to normal levels, and time to recovery of normal menstruation were recorded. AMH levels before and 3 months after HIFU treatment were compared to determine whether USgHIFU treatment affected ovarian reserve.

RESULTS

AMH levels before and 3 months after HIFU ablation were 1.87 ± 1.19 ng/ml and 1.90 ± 1.17 ng/ml, respectively. There was no significant difference in AMH levels between the two-time points (p > .05). The median volume of intraoperative blood loss was 20 ml, the median time for the serum β-hCG level to return to normal was 35.5 days, and the median time of menstruation recovery was 39 days.

CONCLUSIONS

USgHIFU treatment for CSP was effective and safe without affecting ovarian reserve.

Recurrent Cesarean scar pregnancy: case series and literature review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rate of recurrent Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) in our clinical practices and to evaluate whether the mode of treatment of a CSP is associated with the risk of recurrent CSP, as well as to review the published literature on recurrent CSP.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective search of our six obstetric and gynecological departmental ultrasound databases for all CSPs and recurrent CSPs between 2010 and 2019. We extracted various data, including number of CSPs with follow-up, number of cases attempting and number achieving pregnancy following treatment of CSP and number of recurrent CSPs, as well as details of the treatment of the original CSP. After analyzing the clinical data, we evaluated whether the mode of treatment terminating the previous CSP was associated with the risk of recurrent CSP. We also performed a PubMed search for: 'recurrent Cesarean scar pregnancy' and 'recurrent Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy'. Articles were reviewed for year of publication, and extraction and analysis of the same data as those obtained from our departmental databases were performed.

RESULTS

Our database search identified 252 cases of CSP. The overall rate of clinical follow-up ranged between 71.4% and 100%, according to treatment site (mean, 90.9%). Among these, 105 women had another pregnancy after treatment of the previous CSP. Of these, 36 (34.3%) pregnancies were recurrent CSP, with 27 women having a single recurrence and three women having multiple recurrences, one with two, one with three and one with four. We did not find any particular single or combination treatment mode terminating the previous CSP to be associated with recurrent CSP. The literature search identified 17 articles that yielded sufficient information for us to evaluate their reported prevalence of recurrent CSP. These reported 1743 primary diagnoses of CSP, of which 944 had reliable follow-up. Data were available for 489 cases that attempted to conceive again after treatment of a previous CSP, and on the 327 pregnancies achieved. Of these, 67 (20.5%) were recurrent CSP.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our pooled clinical data and review of the literature, recurrent CSP is apparently more common than was previously assumed based upon mostly single-case reports or series with few cases. This should be borne in mind when counseling patients undergoing treatment for CSP regarding their risk of recurrence. We found no obvious causal relationship or association between the type of treatment of the previous CSP and recurrence of CSP. Patients who become pregnant after treatment of a CSP should be encouraged to have an early (5-7-week) first-trimester transvaginal scan to determine the location of the gestation. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Outcomes of reproduction following cesarean scar pregnancy treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Subsequent Fertility in Women Treated for Caesarean Scar Pregnancy With Hysteroscopy: A 5-Year Follow-Up Descriptive Study in a Tertiary Hospital

OBJECTIVE

The outcomes of subsequent pregnancies and fertility in women with a history of caesarean scar pregnancy have not been well described. In this study, we followed up 149 women with a history of caesarean scar pregnancy and analysed the effect on their fertility.

METHODS

149 women with a history of caesarean scar pregnancy were followed up for five years. Of them, 53 women had unprotected sexual intercourse attempting to become pregnant again. Data including clinical parameters and treatment options at the time of diagnosis of caesarean scar pregnancy, and the outcomes in subsequent pregnancy were collected. In addition, a questionnaire about the menstrual cycle after treatment was voluntarily completed by these women.

RESULTS

Of the 53 women, 46 (84%) women had a subsequent pregnancy, while seven (14%) women did not. There was no association between the clinical parameters in previous caesarean scar pregnancy or treatment and future fertility. From the questionnaire, there was no difference seen in the length of the menstrual cycle and menses between the two groups. However, a higher number of women with light menstrual bleeding were seen in women without a subsequent pregnancy (67%), compared with women who did (28%). In addition, six women (13%) who had a subsequent pregnancy experienced foetus death in the first trimester.

CONCLUSION

We reported that 14% of women with a history of cesarean scar pregnancy did not have a subsequent pregnancy, after unprotected sexual intercourse for more than two years. Light menstrual bleeding after treatment may be associated with this adverse effect. Our findings need to be further investigated with large sample size.

Focused Ultrasound Ablation Surgery combined with ultrasound-guided suction curettage in the treatment and management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of Focused Ultrasound Ablation Surgery (FUAS) combined with ultrasound-guided suction curettage in the management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP).

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively analyzed 52 patients with CSP from April, 2017, to December, 2019. All the patients received one session of FUAS, and suction curettage under ultrasound guidance was performed 1-3 days after FUAS. The intraoperative blood loss in suction curettage, duration of vaginal bleeding after curettage, reproductive outcomes, and adverse effects were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

All the 52 patients completed one session of FUAS combined with suction curettage without serious adverse effects. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 32.81 ± 53.83 mL. 47 (90.38 %) patients had a successful suction curettage with a blood loss of less than 80 mL. 5 (9.62 %) patients had an active bleeding of ≥80 mL; however, the bleeding was stopped effectively by Foley's urinary catheter and no evident bleeding presented when the catheter was removed 24 h later. The mean duration of vaginal bleeding was 7.88 ± 4.24 days. 48 (92.30 %) patients recovered with little vaginal bleeding after curettage. 4 (7.69 %) type III CSP patients experienced late-onset severe bleeding and required UAE or surgery. During 6-36 months of the follow-up period, 12 patients expressed reproductive plan, in which 4 patients delivered by cesarean section, 3 patients had an ongoing pregnancy and 1 patient had an abortion in the early pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

FUAS combined with ultrasound-guided suction curettage is a safe and effective treatment strategy in the management of CSP type I and CSP type II and is particularly advantageous for CSP patients with reproductive requirements. However, further studies are warranted to determine the meticulous inclusion criteria for patients with type III CSP.

Efficacy of different treatment of 134 cases of cesarean scar pregnancy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of different methods for treating cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

METHODS

The clinical data of 134 patients diagnosed with CSP in the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University were retrospectively analyzed. Grouped by treatment plan: pretreatments +ultrasound guided Curettage group (group A), pretreatments+ laparotomy (group B). Group A was sub-grouped according to the pretreatments: ultrasound guided uterine evacuation (A1), uterine arterial embolism (UAE) + ultrasound guided uterine evacuation (A2), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) + ultrasound guided uterine evacuation (A3); group B was sub-groups according to pretreatments: laparotomy (B1), UAE + laparotomy (B2).

RESULTS

The success rates of treatment in groups A and B were 72.73%-100%, and it was statistically significant (P<0.05) There were no statistically significant in the blood loss and the degree of decrease of β-hCG in these two group (P>0.05). The operation time, length of stay and cost were statistically significant between curettage group and laparotomy group (P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the degree of β-HCG decrease (%) and surgical bleeding volume. The success rate in group A1-A3 was 64.10%, 96.52% and 100% respectively, which was statistically significant (P<0.05). No statistically significant were showed in operation time, Length of stay and the degree of decrease of β-hCG within 5 days after operation in A1-A3 group (P>0.05). The blood loss and cost between A1 and A3 groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). The success rate in group B1-B2 were both 100%, with no statistically significant (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant in operation time, blood loss, degree of decrease of β-hCG, length of stay between the two groups (P>0.05). The cost between the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided uterine Curettage can be used as a better treatment for type I and II scar pregnancy. UAE or HIFU before Curettage can reduce uterine bleeding, while UAE before the laparotomy did not reduce uterine bleeding.

Reproductive outcome after cesarean scar pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate subsequent reproductive among women with a prior cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were women with a prior CSP, defined as the gestational sac or trophoblast within the dehiscence/niche of the previous cesarean section scar or implanted on top of it. The primary outcome was the recurrence of CSP; secondary outcomes were the chance of achieving a pregnancy after CSP, miscarriage, preterm birth, uterine rupture and the occurrence of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Subgroup analysis according to the management of CSP (surgical vs non-surgical) was also performed. Random effect meta-analyses of proportions were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies (3598 women with CSP) were included. CSP recurred in 17.6% of women. Miscarriage, preterm birth and placenta accreta spectrum disorders complicated 19.1% (65/341), 10.3% (25/243) and 4.0% of pregnancies, and 67.0% were uncomplicated. When stratifying the analysis according to the type of management, CSP recurred in 21% of women undergoing surgical and in 15.2% of those undergoing non-surgical management. Placenta accreta spectrum disorders complicated 4.0% and 12.0% of cases, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with a prior CSP are at high risk of recurrence, miscarriage, preterm birth and placenta accreta spectrum. There is still insufficient evidence to elucidate whether the type of management adopted (surgical vs non-surgical) can impact reproductive outcome after CSP. Further large, prospective studies sharing an objective protocol of prenatal management and long-term follow up are needed to establish the optimal management of CSP and to elucidate whether it may affect its risk of recurrence and pregnancy outcome in subsequent gestations.