Cargando…
A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage
Background: There is no consensus on a standardized therapy for type II cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP II). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety and compare costs associated with transvaginal removal and repair (TRR) of uterine defect for CSP II to those of uterin...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258109/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34239887 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.654956 |
_version_ | 1783718439567753216 |
---|---|
author | Cao, Shanshan Qiu, Guijing Zhang, Peipei Wang, Xinyan Wu, Qing |
author_facet | Cao, Shanshan Qiu, Guijing Zhang, Peipei Wang, Xinyan Wu, Qing |
author_sort | Cao, Shanshan |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: There is no consensus on a standardized therapy for type II cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP II). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety and compare costs associated with transvaginal removal and repair (TRR) of uterine defect for CSP II to those of uterine artery embolization (UAE) and curettage. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study that included 87 patients diagnosed with CSP II and treated by performing UAE in combination with curettage and hysteroscopy (n = 53), or TRR (n = 34). Clinical data and outcomes were analyzed. Results: UAE and TRR groups exhibited similar success rates. The TRR group had significantly lower complication rates (30.19 vs. 8.82%, P < 0.05) and lower total costs (13,765.89 ± 2,029.12 vs. 9,063.82 ± 954.67, P < 0.05) than the UAE group. The anterior myometrium of the lower uterine segment was relatively thicker after performing TRR, and no patient suffered from recurrent CSP II. The proportion of patients in the TRR group who had full-term delivery without uterine rupture was 88.24% (30/34), while four patients failed to pregnancy. Conclusion: TRR is a safe and effective treatment method for patients with CSP II and presents a highly cost-effective outcome, especially for patients with future fertility desire. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8258109 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82581092021-07-07 A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage Cao, Shanshan Qiu, Guijing Zhang, Peipei Wang, Xinyan Wu, Qing Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine Background: There is no consensus on a standardized therapy for type II cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP II). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety and compare costs associated with transvaginal removal and repair (TRR) of uterine defect for CSP II to those of uterine artery embolization (UAE) and curettage. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study that included 87 patients diagnosed with CSP II and treated by performing UAE in combination with curettage and hysteroscopy (n = 53), or TRR (n = 34). Clinical data and outcomes were analyzed. Results: UAE and TRR groups exhibited similar success rates. The TRR group had significantly lower complication rates (30.19 vs. 8.82%, P < 0.05) and lower total costs (13,765.89 ± 2,029.12 vs. 9,063.82 ± 954.67, P < 0.05) than the UAE group. The anterior myometrium of the lower uterine segment was relatively thicker after performing TRR, and no patient suffered from recurrent CSP II. The proportion of patients in the TRR group who had full-term delivery without uterine rupture was 88.24% (30/34), while four patients failed to pregnancy. Conclusion: TRR is a safe and effective treatment method for patients with CSP II and presents a highly cost-effective outcome, especially for patients with future fertility desire. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-06-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8258109/ /pubmed/34239887 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.654956 Text en Copyright © 2021 Cao, Qiu, Zhang, Wang and Wu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Medicine Cao, Shanshan Qiu, Guijing Zhang, Peipei Wang, Xinyan Wu, Qing A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title | A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title_full | A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title_fullStr | A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title_short | A Comparison of Transvaginal Removal and Repair of Uterine Defect for Type II Cesarean Scar Pregnancy and Uterine Artery Embolization Combined With Curettage |
title_sort | comparison of transvaginal removal and repair of uterine defect for type ii cesarean scar pregnancy and uterine artery embolization combined with curettage |
topic | Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258109/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34239887 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.654956 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT caoshanshan acomparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT qiuguijing acomparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT zhangpeipei acomparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT wangxinyan acomparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT wuqing acomparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT caoshanshan comparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT qiuguijing comparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT zhangpeipei comparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT wangxinyan comparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage AT wuqing comparisonoftransvaginalremovalandrepairofuterinedefectfortypeiicesareanscarpregnancyanduterinearteryembolizationcombinedwithcurettage |