Evaluation of the necessity of laparoscopic repair of a uterine scar defect for cesarean scar pregnancy

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.

Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: nuances in diagnosis and treatment

A cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy (CSEP) occurs when the embryo implants on the scar of a previous cesarean delivery. The number of births delivered by cesarean section has climbed by 50% over the last decade, from a nadir of 20.7% in 1996 to 32.1% in 2021. As a result, the incidence of CSEP has also increased. Because CSEP may cause serious morbidity such as life-threatening hemorrhage, uterine rupture, placental accreta spectrum, hysterectomy, and even mortality, accurate diagnosis and appropriate management of this condition are essential. This review focuses on the etiology, incidence, clinical diagnosis, and management of CSEPs.

Laparoscopic Fluorescence Guided Detection of Uterine Niche-The Next Step in Surgical Diagnosis and Treatment

(1) Background: Uterine niche is a frequent condition in patients with a history of cesarean section. Although the relation to uterotomy seems to be clear, the exact pathogenesis is not fully understood. Uterine niche can easily be diagnosed by transvaginal ultrasound. It can be related to symptoms like dysmenorrhea, bleeding disorders, dysuria and dyspareunia. Uterine niche can be the cause of scar pregnancy, a rare form of ectopic pregnancy which can be related to severe complications; (2) Methods: We present a series of nine cases with different uterine niche related findings and discuss the diagnostic and therapeutic options reviewing the current literature and introduce a novel intrauterine ICG use for laparoscopic niche detection in one case; (3) Results: Most of uterine niche related symptoms and complications can be treated by a minimally invasive approach. Laparoscopic fluorescence guided niche detection is feasible; (4) Conclusions: Hysteroscopic and laparoscopic techniques allow the treatment of uterine niche related symptoms and complications. Intrauterine ICG application during fluorescence guided laparoscopy may allow easy niche detection.