Successful direct bipolar resection of 6th week cesarean scar pregnancy: case report and literature review

The effectiveness of hysteroscopy for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a long-term complication of cesarean section characterized by the localization of a subsequent gestational sac within the scar area or niche developed as a result of a previous cesarean section. Its incidence has increased substantially because of the high global cesarean section rate in recent decades. Several surgical and drug treatments exist for this condition; however, there is currently no optimal treatment. This study compared the effectiveness of direct hysteroscopic removal of the gestational tissue and hysteroscopy combined with vacuum suction for the treatment of CSP.

METHODS

From 2017 to 2023, 521 patients were diagnosed with CSP at our hospital. Of these patients, 45 underwent hysteroscopy. Among them, 28 underwent direct hysteroscopic removal (hysteroscopic removal group) and 17 underwent hysteroscopy combined with vacuum suction (hysteroscopic suction group). The clinical characteristics and outcomes of the hysteroscopic removal group and hysteroscopic suction group were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 45 patients, the amount of bleeding and hospitalization cost were significantly higher in the hysteroscopic removal group than in the hysteroscopic suction group (33.8 mL vs. 9.9 mL, P < 0.001; and 8744.0 yuan vs. 5473.8 yuan, P < 0.001; respectively). The operation time and duration of hospitalization were significantly longer in the hysteroscopic removal group than in the hysteroscopic suction group (61.4 min vs. 28.2 min, P < 0.001; and 3.8 days vs. 2.4 days, P = 0.026; respectively). Three patients in the hysteroscopic removal group had uterine perforation and received laparoscopic repair during operation. No complications occurred in the hysteroscopic suction group. One patient in the hysteroscopic removal group received ultrasound-guided suction curettage due to postoperative moderate vaginal bleeding, and one patient in the hysteroscopic suction group received ultrasound-guided suction curettage due to postoperative gestational residue and elevated serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels. Reproductive function was preserved in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Hysteroscopy is an effective method for treating CSP. Compared with direct hysteroscopic removal, hysteroscopy combined with vacuum suction is more suitable for CSP. However, multicenter prospective studies with large sample sizes are required for verification of these findings.

Diagnostic value of enhanced-contrast ultrasound for cesarean scar pregnancy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cesarean scar pregnancy, an uncommon ectopic pregnancy in which the embryo is implanted in the cesarean scar, poses significant risks without prompt diagnosis and treatment. Its prevalence has risen alongside increased cesarean section rates. Despite various treatment approaches, consensus remains elusive. Ultrasonography, particularly contrast-enhanced ultrasonography, shows promise in cesarean scar pregnancy diagnosis.

MAIN BODY

This systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines, explores contrast-enhanced ultrasound's diagnostic potential in cesarean scar pregnancy. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to August 2023. Selection involved two stages: title/abstract screening and full-text assessment. The included studies investigated contrast-enhanced ultrasound's diagnostic value in cesarean scar pregnancy, provided adequate data, and were peer-reviewed in English. Quality assessment followed the QUADAS-2 criteria. We extracted the diagnostic accuracy metrics: sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Out of 193 records, five studies met the inclusion criteria (2016-2020, China). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound displayed sensitivities of 77%-100% and specificities of 95%-100%. Two studies reported accuracy of 96.9%-97.8%. Compared with conventional ultrasound, contrast-enhanced ultrasound exhibited superior sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. It also outperformed transvaginal ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

Enhanced-contrast ultrasound holds promise for diagnosing and managing cesarean scar pregnancy by visualizing scar vascularization in real-time, thereby reducing severe complication risks. This review highlights contrast-enhanced ultrasound as a transformative diagnostic tool for cesarean scar pregnancy management, despite existing evidence limitations.

Surgical evacuation of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies

Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy is associated with significant maternal morbidity, including severe hemorrhage, need for the blood transfusion and hysterectomy. Early diagnosis is therefore key in ensuring timely management, with consensus being that treatment before 9 weeks of gestation leads to reduced morbidity. There is no universally adopted management protocol for cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, but surgical management generally has a higher success rate than medical management. The primary surgical treatment modalities are suction evacuation versus resection of the pregnancy via multiple routes. Adjuncts that have been shown to successfully minimize bleeding with surgical management include cervical cerclage, balloon catheter, and uterine artery embolization. However, there remains a lack of high-quality evidence regarding what is the best surgical treatment option for cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, and therefore it is essential that clinicians provide tailored management to patients considering the presenting symptoms and local expertise with various surgical techniques.

Hysteroscopic Intact Removal of Angular and Caesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Novel and Markedly Less Invasive Surgical Treatment

INTRODUCTION

Ectopic pregnancy is the most common cause of mortality during the first trimester of pregnancy, and intrauterine ectopic pregnancies show significantly higher morbidity and mortality than extrauterine ones. Despite being less invasive, safety and effectiveness of the hysteroscopic treatment are still unclear. Moreover, such approach is not standardized. We aimed to evaluate safety and effectiveness of hysteroscopic intact removal of angular or cesarean section scar pregnancies, defining a novel and markedly less invasive hysteroscopic technique with a 5-mm Bettocchi hysteroscope or a 3.5-mm Versascope hysteroscope.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records and video archives were reviewed for all the patients with angular or caesarean scar pregnancies treated with hysteroscopic intact removal technique from January 2000 to December 2018 at our Department. Success and complication rates were assessed.

RESULTS

Four patients with angular (n = 1) or cesarean scar pregnancy (n = 3) met inclusion criteria. Case #1 was treated with bipolar resectoscope, cases #2 and #3 with 5-mm Bettocchi hysteroscope, and case #4 with 3.5-mm Versascope hysteroscope. Cases #2-4 did not require cervical dilatation. Before hysteroscopic treatment, cases #2-4 underwent unsuccessful medical therapy with multiple-dose methotrexate. Hysteroscopic treatment success rate was 100%, while complication rate was 0%. All patients were treated with a novel technique: hysteroscopic intact removal of angular or cesarean scar pregnancies. Such technique was described step-by-step.

CONCLUSIONS

Hysteroscopic treatment of angular and cesarean scar pregnancies may be a safe and effective minimally invasive option. The novel technique of hysteroscopic intact removal technique may allow a markedly less invasive approach.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound and Uterine Artery Embolization in Caesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) followed by curettage and uterine artery embolization (UAE) followed by curettage are two methods of treatment for caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). There is currently no consistent evidence concerning any difference in efficacy and safety between UAE and HIFU. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of HIFU and UAE in the treatment of CSP.

METHODS

Studies published in PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese BioMedical Literature Service System, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched and the main outcomes in the studies were extracted.

RESULTS

Of 8 studies and 715 patients included in this study, 388 and 327 patients were in the HIFU group and UAE groups, respectively. Compared with the UAE group, patients in the HIFU group had less blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 22.58 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 44.45 to - 0.70; p < 0.05), lower incidence of adverse events [odds ratio (OR) = 0.17; 95% CI 0.06-0.46; p < 0.05); shorter duration of hospital stay (WMD = - 0.96 days; 95% CI - 1.88 to - 0.03; p < 0.05); and a longer β-human chorionic gonadotropin normalisation time (WMD = 9.59 days; 95% CI 1.66-17.52; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients in the HIFU group appeared to have better outcomes than those in the UAE group; thus, HIFU may be a priority option for the early management of CSP. However, this needs to be confirmed by multi-centre, large-scale randomised controlled trials.

Prevalence of Infertility Among Patients With Isthmocele and Fertility Outcome After Isthmocele Surgical Treatment: A Retrospective Study

Background: An isthmocele is a diverticulum on the anterior wall of the uterine isthmus at the site of a cesarean delivery scar. We evaluated the prevalence of infertility among patients with isthmocele, the resolution of symptoms, and infertility outcomes after hysteroscopic isthmoplasty. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 35 consecutive patients with symptomatic isthmocele between 2010 and 2015 at Hospital Piero Palagi in Florence, Italy. Patients with symptomatic isthmocele had postmenstrual abnormal uterine bleeding, sovrapubic pain, and infertility. Results: The study population was divided into Group A - Fertile Patients (n=19) and Group B - Infertile Patients (n=16) according to the prevalence of infertility after the diagnosis of isthmocele. Group B was subdivided into Group B1 (became pregnant, n=9) and B2 (did not become pregnant, n=7) according to infertility resolution after isthmocele treatment. We found statistically significant differences between Groups A and B regarding the number of cesarean sections (P=0.0205), the grade of isthmocele (P=0.0421), and body mass index (P=0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, we found statistically significant differences between Groups B1 and B2 for age (P=0.0151), grade of isthmocele (P=0.0361), and cervical dilatation (P=0.0293). Conclusion: We identified a subgroup of patients at higher risk of being infertile after the diagnosis of isthmocele and a subgroup of patients who could benefit the most in terms of fertility after minimally invasive hysteroscopic surgery.

Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy: Current Management Strategies

Importance

Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy (CSEP) has a high rate of morbidity with nonspecific signs and symptoms making identification difficult. The criterion-standard treatment of CSEP has been subject to debate.

Objective

This review defines CSEP, discusses pathogenesis and diagnosis, and compares treatment options and outcomes.

Evidence Acquisition

A literature review was performed utilizing the term cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy and subsequently selecting only meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Only articles published in English were included. Relevant articles within the reviews were analyzed as necessary.

Results

Five basic pathways have been identified in treatment of CSEP: expectant management, medical therapy, surgical intervention, uterine artery embolization, or a combination approach. Expectant management has the highest probability of morbid outcomes, including hemorrhage, uterine rupture, and preterm delivery. Medical management often requires further treatment with additional medication or surgery. Different surgical methods have been explored including uterine artery embolization; dilation and curettage; surgical removal via vaginal, laparoscopic, or laparotomic approach; and hysterectomy. Each method has various levels of success and depends on surgeon skill and patient presentation.

Conclusions

Recent research supports any method that removes the pregnancy and scar to reduce morbidity and promote future fertility. Laparoscopic and transvaginal approaches are options for CSEP treatment, although continued research is required to identify the optimal approach.

Relevance

As cesarean delivery numbers rise, a subsequent increase in CSEPs can be anticipated. The ability to accurately diagnose and treat this morbid condition is vital to the practice of any specialist in general obstetrics and gynecology.

The Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

Objective. To evaluate the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). Methods. Clinical data from 92 patients with lower uterine segment pregnancy, who underwent conventional ultrasound and CEUS examination in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, were collected by Xinqiao Hospital Third Military Medical University from March 2014 to March 2015. The parameters of ultrasound contrast time-intensity curve (TIC), including arrival time, time to peak, time from peak to one half, basic intensity, peak intensity, and wash-in slope, were analyzed. Results. Of the 92 cases of patients with pregnancy in the lower uterine segment, 52 cases were CSP, and 40 cases were intrauterine pregnancy. CEUS was significantly better than conventional ultrasound in terms of sensitivity, negative predictive value, Youden index, and diagnostic accuracy (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in specificity and positive predictive value (P > 0.05). Conclusion. CEUS has a higher accuracy than conventional ultrasound in diagnosis of CSP.

Incidence, diagnosis and management of tubal and nontubal ectopic pregnancies: a review

BACKGROUND

Ectopic pregnancy is a potentially life-threatening condition occurring in 1-2 % of all pregnancies. The most common ectopic implantation site is the fallopian tube, though 10 % of ectopic pregnancies implant in the cervix, ovary, myometrium, interstitial portion of the fallopian tube, abdominal cavity or within a cesarean section scar.

FINDINGS

Diagnosis involves a combination of clinical symptoms, serology, and ultrasound. Medical management is a safe and effective option in most clinically stable patients. Patients who have failed medical management, are ineligible, or present with ruptured ectopic pregnancy or heterotopic pregnancy are most often managed with excision by laparoscopy or, less commonly, laparotomy. Management of nontubal ectopic pregnancies may involve medical or surgical treatment, or a combination, as dictated by ectopic pregnancy location and the patient's clinical stability. Following tubal ectopic pregnancy, the rate of subsequent intrauterine pregnancy is high and independent of treatment modality.

CONCLUSION

This review describes the incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, and management of tubal and non-tubal ectopic and heterotopic pregnancies, and reviews the existing data regarding recurrence and future fertility.

Novel Medical Therapy of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy With a Viable Embryo Combining Multidose Methotrexate and Mifepristone: A Case Report

An ectopic pregnancy is defined as cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) when the products of conception are implanted within the myometrium in the area of a cesarean section scar. CSP can be a life-threatening condition and to date there is no clear consensus for CSP management. A medical approach joining high treatment rates with fertility preservation could be a safer and less invasive method of therapy.We present a case of CSP with a viable embryo that was successfully treated with a novel medical therapy combining multidose methotrexate (MTX) and mifepristone.No further additional invasive procedure was required since pregnancy products were dissolved and no major complications were experienced.Multidose MTX and mifepristone can be considered a safe and effective treatment for CSP.