Dilatation and curettage versus lesion resection in the treatment of cesarean-scar-pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Treatment of ectopic pregnancy implanted on cesarea scar: cohort study 2018-2022, Lima, Peru

Objectives

To describe the clinical characteristics and treatment of ectopic pregnancy arising in the cesarean section scar, as well as its complications and obstetric prognosis.

Material and methods

Retrospective cohort study of pregnant women with the diagnosis of a scar pregnancy in accordance with Maternal-Fetal Medicine Society criteria, seen between January 2018 and March 2022 in two high complexity institutions of the social security system, located in Lima, Peru. Consecutive sampling was used. Baseline sociodemographic and clinical variables were measured, including diagnosis, type of treatment, complications and obstetric prognosis. A descriptive analysis was performed.

Results

Out of 29,919 deliveries, 17 patients were included. Of these, 41.2 % received medical management and the rest were treated surgically. Successful management with intra-gestational sac methotrexate was performed in two patients with ectopic pregnancy type 2. Four patients required total hysterectomy. Six patients became pregnant after the treatment and 4 completed their pregnancy with healthy mother and neonate pairs.

Conclusions

Ectopic pregnancy implanted in a cesarean section scar is an infrequent occurrence for which medical and surgical management options are available with apparently good outcomes. Further studies of better methodological quality and random assignment are needed in order to help characterize the safety and effectiveness of the various therapeutic options for women with suspected scar pregnancy.

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.

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.

Chinese herbal medicine for threatened miscarriage: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for threatened miscarriage. Data Sources: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 30 June 2022. Study Eligibility Criteria: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy and safety of CHM or combined CHM and Western medicine (CHM-WM) and compared with other treatments for threatened miscarriage were included for analysis. Methods: Three review authors independently evaluated included studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data for meta-analysis (continuation of pregnancy after 28 gestational weeks, continuation of pregnancy after treatment, preterm birth, adverse maternal outcomes, neonatal death, TCM syndrome severity, β-hCG levels after treatment), sensitivity analysis (β-hCG level) and subgroup analysis (TCM syndrome severity, β-hCG level). The risk ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated by RevMan. Certainty of the evidence was assessed according to GRADE. Results: Overall, 57 RCTs involving 5,881 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with WM alone, CHM alone showed significant higher incidence of continuation of pregnancy after 28 gestational weeks (Risk Ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21; n = 1; moderate quality of evidence), continuation of pregnancy after treatment (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38; n = 10; moderate quality of evidence), higher β-hCG level (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) 6.88; 95% CI 1.74 to 12.03; n = 4) and lower Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome severity (SMD -2.94; 95% CI -4.27 to -1.61; n = 2). Compared with WM alone, combined CHM-WM showed significant higher incidence of continuation of pregnancy after 28 gestational weeks (RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.27; n = 15; moderate quality of evidence), continuation of pregnancy after treatment (RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.23; n = 41; moderate quality of evidence), higher β-hCG level (SMD 2.27; 95% CI 1.72 to 2.83; n = 37) and lower TCM syndrome severity (SMD -1.74; 95% CI -2.21 to -1.27; n = 15). No significant differences in reducing the adverse maternal outcomes and neonatal death were found in combined CHM-WM compared with WM alone (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.52; n = 8; RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.12 to 1.21; n = 2). Conclusion: Current evidence supported CHM could be a potential treatment for threatened miscarriage. However, results should be interpreted with caution considering the low to moderate quality of the available evidence. Systematic Review Registration: [https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-6-0107/], identifier [INPLASY20220107].

The timing of intravenous oxytocin administration is crucial to minimize perioperative blood loss during first-trimester suction curettage for missed abortion

BACKGROUND

Oxytocin is commonly used to reduce blood loss during suction curettage for missed abortion. However, the potential of oxytocin to mitigate blood loss in early pregnancy remains controversial. Based on the hypothesis that the "timing" of oxytocin administration may be a critical factor, we investigated whether the timing of intravenous (IV) administration is associated with reduced perioperative blood loss during first-trimester suction curettage for missed abortion.

METHODS

The medical charts of 146 patients with ultrasound-confirmed first-trimester missed abortion who underwent suction curettage with IV oxytocin administration were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Among the patients, 67 received 10 IU of IV oxytocin before suction curettage (early-oxytocin administration group), while 79 patients received 10 IU of IV oxytocin after suction curettage (late-oxytocin administration group). The demographic features between the two groups did not significantly differ. However, there was a lower proportion of nulliparous patients in the early-oxytocin administration group than in the late-oxytocin administration group (38.8% vs 60.8%, p = 0.006). The perioperative blood loss amount was significantly lower in the early-oxytocin administration group than in the late-oxytocin administration group (60 [range: 50-100] vs 100 [range: 30-250] mL, p = 0.001). Moreover, the multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the early-oxytocin administration group had a lower risk for a perioperative blood loss amount of ≥100 mL than the late-oxytocin administration group (0.23 [range: 0.10-0.55], p = 0.001); a gestational age of 9-12 weeks ( p = 0.009) was found to be associated with an increased risk for a perioperative blood loss amount of ≥100 mL.

CONCLUSION

Compared with late-oxytocin administration, early-oxytocin administration could reduce perioperative blood loss during first-trimester suction curettage for missed abortion. However, the results require further investigation.

Reproductive outcomes of cesarean scar pregnancies treated with uterine artery embolization combined with curettage

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review the reproductive outcomes of women with a cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated with dilation and curettage (D&C) after uterine artery embolization (UAE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study to review women who received UAE followed by D&C for CSP between January 2010 and December 2019 at the Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua in Taiwan. Data were collected from both electronic and paper medical records. Patients were contact via phone call to follow up reproductive outcomes between January 2021 and March 2021. These subsequent reproductive outcomes (including pregnancy rate, secondary infertility rate, miscarriage rate, live birth rate, and recurrent CSP rate) were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 53 cases of women who received UAE followed by D&C for CSP were identified. The women's average age was 34.8 ± 5.1 years. The mean gestational age at diagnosis was 6.2 ± 1.1 weeks. The mean level for human chorionic gonadotropin was 23,407.7 ± 29,105.5 mIU/ml. The average of blood loss during D&C was 19.2 ± 43.6 ml. The average hospitalization time after D&C was 3.5 ± 1.1 days. Of the 53 cases, 10 patients were lost to follow-up and 43 patients agreed to follow-up on reproductive outcomes in 2021. Twenty-three patients who desired to conceive were analyzed. Nineteen out of these 23 women (82.6%) succeeded in conceiving again and gave birth to 15 healthy babies (78.9%). Only one woman (1/19, 5.3%) experienced recurrence of CSP. The average time interval between previous CSP treatment and subsequent conception was 10.4 ± 6.7 months.

CONCLUSION

UAE combined with curettage treatment in CSP patients results in a positive rate of subsequent pregnancy outcomes. This minimally invasive procedure may be considered as one of the treatment options for CSP, as it enables preservation of fertility after treatment.

Uterine Artery Embolization Combined with Subsequent Suction Evacuation as Low-Risk Treatment for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

Objective: The aim of this study is to propose a standardized management of care for patients diagnosed with cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). There are two types of CSP: Type 1 (on the scar) vs. type 2 (in the niche). To date there is no international standard to predict the extent of invasion or the optimal management of CSP. Materials and methods: We used intramuscular methotrexate injection followed by uterine artery embolization combined with suction evacuation as a conservative approach for the treatment of seven patients diagnosed with CSP. Our inclusion criteria, to be satisfied simultaneously, were established as follows: (1) patients with CSP; (2) early gestational age ≤ 9 weeks, and (3) written consent of the proposed treatment of the patient. Results: This course of treatment produced a positive outcome in all cases. We did not have any complications (e.g., emergency hysterectomy, perforation of the uterine cavity, severe hemorrhage, or endometritis) during the procedures or in the follow-up. The most important predictors of successful management are early diagnosis of CSP and orientation of the invasive trophoblast opposite to the scar. Conclusions: The main finding from this series of cases is that associating systemic methotrexate and uterine artery embolization provides efficient and low-risk management of CSP. This treatment regime is adequate for both types of CSPs. We consider that early localization diagnosis of pregnancy following a cesarean delivery is mandatory for CSP morbidity prevention.

A review on management of caesarean scar pregnancy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current literature on management of cesarean scar pregnancy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a complex pathologic condition, which is strictly related to a previous caesarean section. It is an iatrogenic disorder, that has had an exponential increase over the last few years linked to the parallel increase in the number of caesarean sections. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) confirmed the presence of surgical, medical, and minimally invasive therapies for caesarean scar pregnancy management but the optimal treatment is not known; the main recommendation is to avoid expectant management of CSP (GRADE 1B). The treatments for Caesarean scar pregnancy are multiple, and they include a surgical management, a medical management and a combination between these two types of treatments. Despite the recommendation of SMFM in this review, we also included some cases of conservative management published in the last months.

SUMMARY

Considering all the different approaches on CSP, the management has to be individualized mainly on gestational age and it has to be discussed by a multidisciplinary team, to choose the safest clinical option.