4.3 Article

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

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH
Volume 50, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/03000605221123875

Keywords

Ultrasonography; cesarean scar pregnancy; curettage; bleeding; lacunae; gestational sac

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively observed 31 patients with cesarean scar pregnancy and evaluated the treatment outcomes and related factors using ultrasound imaging features. The results showed that the growth direction of the gestational sac, residual myometrial thickness, and chorionic parenchyma characteristics may be high-risk factors for major bleeding caused by curettage in cesarean scar pregnancy.
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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available