Cargando…

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

PURPOSE: The effect of mifepristone for treatment of low-risk cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) was monitored by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). METHODS: Data were collected from 23 CSP patients with a 10-point risk score <5 (low-risk CSP) and from 23 intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) patients with a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xiong, Xi, Gao, Chun-yan, Ying, De-mei, Yan, Ping, Zhang, Zhi-jia, Kuang, Na, Tian, Hong-ju, Luo, Li, Long, Shu-yu, Chen, Zheng-qiong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7781728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33447168
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/3725353
_version_ 1783631736291196928
author Xiong, Xi
Gao, Chun-yan
Ying, De-mei
Yan, Ping
Zhang, Zhi-jia
Kuang, Na
Tian, Hong-ju
Luo, Li
Long, Shu-yu
Chen, Zheng-qiong
author_facet Xiong, Xi
Gao, Chun-yan
Ying, De-mei
Yan, Ping
Zhang, Zhi-jia
Kuang, Na
Tian, Hong-ju
Luo, Li
Long, Shu-yu
Chen, Zheng-qiong
author_sort Xiong, Xi
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The effect of mifepristone for treatment of low-risk cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) was monitored by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). METHODS: Data were collected from 23 CSP patients with a 10-point risk score <5 (low-risk CSP) and from 23 intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) patients with a scar from a previous cesarean delivery. All patients were prescribed 75 mg mifepristone daily for 2 days and underwent transvaginal CEUS before and after administration of mifepristone. On the third day, uterine curettage was performed after transvaginal CEUS. Arrival time (AT), peak intensity (PI), and area under the curve (AUC) around the gestational sac were monitored by CEUS before and after application of mifepristone, and the rate of effective treatment was compared between the two patient groups. RESULTS: No patients experienced side effects from either the CEUS procedure or the mifepristone treatment. Changes in AT, PI, and AUC index from before vs. after mifepristone treatment did not differ significantly between the two groups (all p values >0.05). There was also no significant difference in the rate of effective treatment between the two groups (95.65% in the CSP group vs. 100% in the IUP group; p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on monitoring by CEUS, the effect of mifepristone in low-risk CSP was comparable to that in IUP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7781728
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77817282021-01-13 Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Xiong, Xi Gao, Chun-yan Ying, De-mei Yan, Ping Zhang, Zhi-jia Kuang, Na Tian, Hong-ju Luo, Li Long, Shu-yu Chen, Zheng-qiong Contrast Media Mol Imaging Research Article PURPOSE: The effect of mifepristone for treatment of low-risk cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) was monitored by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). METHODS: Data were collected from 23 CSP patients with a 10-point risk score <5 (low-risk CSP) and from 23 intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) patients with a scar from a previous cesarean delivery. All patients were prescribed 75 mg mifepristone daily for 2 days and underwent transvaginal CEUS before and after administration of mifepristone. On the third day, uterine curettage was performed after transvaginal CEUS. Arrival time (AT), peak intensity (PI), and area under the curve (AUC) around the gestational sac were monitored by CEUS before and after application of mifepristone, and the rate of effective treatment was compared between the two patient groups. RESULTS: No patients experienced side effects from either the CEUS procedure or the mifepristone treatment. Changes in AT, PI, and AUC index from before vs. after mifepristone treatment did not differ significantly between the two groups (all p values >0.05). There was also no significant difference in the rate of effective treatment between the two groups (95.65% in the CSP group vs. 100% in the IUP group; p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on monitoring by CEUS, the effect of mifepristone in low-risk CSP was comparable to that in IUP. Hindawi 2020-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7781728/ /pubmed/33447168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/3725353 Text en Copyright © 2020 Xi Xiong et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Xiong, Xi
Gao, Chun-yan
Ying, De-mei
Yan, Ping
Zhang, Zhi-jia
Kuang, Na
Tian, Hong-ju
Luo, Li
Long, Shu-yu
Chen, Zheng-qiong
Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title_full Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title_fullStr Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title_full_unstemmed Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title_short Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Mifepristone for Treatment of Low-Risk Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
title_sort contrast-enhanced ultrasound evaluation of mifepristone for treatment of low-risk cesarean scar pregnancy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7781728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33447168
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/3725353
work_keys_str_mv AT xiongxi contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT gaochunyan contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT yingdemei contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT yanping contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT zhangzhijia contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT kuangna contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT tianhongju contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT luoli contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT longshuyu contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy
AT chenzhengqiong contrastenhancedultrasoundevaluationofmifepristonefortreatmentoflowriskcesareanscarpregnancy