A Comparison of Treatment Options for Type 1 and Type 2 Caesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Retrospective Case Series Study

Complex Blood Supply Patterns in Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: Insights from Digital Subtraction Angiography Imaging

BACKGROUND Understanding the blood supply pattern of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) can effectively help to determine the best choice of treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the blood supply pattern and outcomes of patients with CSP through digital subtraction angiography (DSA) imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the type of CSP. The DSA images of these patients were reviewed, including the type of blood supply, dominant vessel, and collateral blood supply to the gestational sac. The clinical outcomes were analyzed between the 2 groups. RESULTS Thirty-seven patients with type I and 29 patients with type II CSP were enrolled in this study. Type II CSP showed a higher proportion of rich blood supply than type I (44.83% vs 29.72%, P>0.05). Compared with type II CSP, type I CSP tended to have bilateral dominant blood supply predominance (67.57% vs 41.38%, P<0.05). The incidence of collateral blood supply was 5.41% in the type I CSP group and 31.03% in the type II CSP group (P<0.05). In the type II CSP group, multiple collateral blood vessels were found in 4 patients. The superior vesicle artery was the most common source of collateral blood supply in both groups. Two patients with type II CSP suffered massive bleeding during surgery after uterine artery embolization (UAE). None of the patients received a hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS UAE is safe and effective for both types of CSP. The blood supply pattern is more complex and abnormal in type II CSP. More attention should be paid to the collateral blood supply to achieve complete embolization during the UAE procedure in the case of type II CSP.

Other treatments for CSP

Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is an increasingly common clinical conundrum. The non-curettage surgical management of CSP can be categorised into hysteroscopic, vaginal, laparoscopic, and open removal modalities and the choice of treatment is surgeon-dependent. A systematic review of original studies reporting surgical treatment outcomes of CSP until March 2023 was conducted to evaluate the non-curettage surgical management of this highly morbid condition. A total of 60 studies of mostly weak methodological quality were identified involving 6720 CSP cases. Success rates were generally high across all treatment modalities although highest in vaginal and laparoscopic excisional approaches. Morbidity was most associated with haemorrhage although unplanned hysterectomy rates remained low across all treatment groups. Subsequent pregnancies are associated with morbidity despite being underreported and the impact of CSP treatment on future pregnancy is poorly understood. Substantive study heterogeneity precludes meta-analyses of pooled data and treatment superiority has not been demonstrated.

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.

The Efficacy and Health Economics of Different Treatments for Type 1 Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and health economics of four treatments for type 1 cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).

Methods: From January 2009 to December 2018, 326 patients diagnosed with type 1 CSP were examined, among whom 31 received ultrasound-guided local injection of methotrexate (local injection group), 160 patients received uterine artery embolization combined with suction aspiration (UAE group), 25 patients received ultrasound-guided suction aspiration (aspiration group) and 90 received ultrasound-guided local injection of lauromacrogol combined with suction aspiration (lauromacrogol group). Clinical data and outcomes were analyzed. The decision tree model was used to compare the economics of four treatments.

Results: The success rate of the local injection group was 71.0% (22/31), which was significantly different from 98.8% (158/160) of the UAE group and 100.0% (90/90) of the lauromacrogol group. The success rate of the aspiration group was 92.0% (23/25), which was significantly lower than that of the lauromacrogol group. The cost-effectiveness ratio was 1,876.53 yuan for the aspiration group, 2,164.63 yuan for the lauromacrogol group, 4,383.56 yuan for the local injection group, and 7,850.81 yuan for the UAE group. The Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the lauromacrogol group to the aspiration group was 5,477.75 yuan, indicating that if the willing to pay of patients was higher than 5,477.75 yuan, the lauromacrogol group had a cost-effectiveness advantage in treating type 1 CSP, compared to aspiration group. On the contrary, aspiration group has a higher cost-effectiveness advantage. The ICER of the lauromacrogol group to the local injection group or the UAE group were both less than 0, indicating that local injection group and UAE group was not cost-effective in the treatment of type 1 CSP.

Conclusion: For type 1 CSP, the ultrasound-guided local injection of lauromacrogol combined with suction aspiration and ultrasound-guided suction aspiration, are effective and economical, and the choice between the two can be based on the patient’s willing to pay.

A Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Curettage With and Without Uterine Artery Embolization on Controlling Intraoperative Blood Loss for a Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Treatment: Study Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction

Cesarean scar pregnancy affects 6% of all ectopic pregnancies in women with prior cesarean section, and there is currently no consensus on the optimal treatment. Options of surgical treatment have a risk of intraoperative blood loss; therefore, uterine artery embolization (UAE) has been considered as an option of reducing intraoperative blood loss. However, UAE may be overused in clinical practice, especially in China. We present this protocol for a randomized clinical trial investigating the necessity of performing UAE for cesarean scar pregnancy, in combination with surgical suction curettage, taking into account the different subtypes of cesarean scar pregnancy. We recently developed a risk-scoring system (QRS) to estimate intraoperative blood loss, with 93.8% sensitivity and 6.3% false negative. Through this randomized clinical trial, we will retrospectively validate the QRS score on predicting intraoperative blood loss.

Methods and Analysis

We propose undertaking a randomized clinical trial sequentially recruiting 200 patients. All the patients will randomly receive ultrasound guided curettage with or without UAE. Data on the subtypes of cesarean scar pregnancy (Types 1 and II and III) detected by ultrasound will be collected before operation. The score on estimating intraoperative blood loss assessed by our recently developed quantitative risk-scoring system (QRS) will be collected before the operation. We will primarily compare the duration of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, and complications between the two groups. We will also retrospectively analyze the association of subtypes of cesarean scar pregnancy and the options of treatment and validate the QRS score. Outcomes of subsequent pregnancy within the 2-year follow-up will be secondary outcomes.

Trial Registration Number

[website], identifier ChiCTR2100041654.