Cargando…

Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation (HIFU-a) or uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage (USg-D&C) was effective. However, there is insufficient comparative research evidence on c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Xi, Yang, Bing, Chen, Wenzhi, Chen, JinYun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726079
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05376-0
_version_ 1784881016326848512
author Wang, Xi
Yang, Bing
Chen, Wenzhi
Chen, JinYun
author_facet Wang, Xi
Yang, Bing
Chen, Wenzhi
Chen, JinYun
author_sort Wang, Xi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation (HIFU-a) or uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage (USg-D&C) was effective. However, there is insufficient comparative research evidence on clinical efficacy and subsequent pregnancy outcomes after previous CSP treatment. This study aims to investigate the efficacy, safety, and subsequent pregnancy outcomes of HIFU-a compared to UAE before USg-D&C for the treatment of CSP. METHODS: Between January 2016 and July 2020, a total of 272 patients received the pretreatment with HIFU-a or UAE(HIFU-a group: n = 118; UAE group: n = 154). The clinical characteristics, treatment success rate, postoperative pregnancy rate and outcome of the two groups were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. After pretreatment, the adverse events rate of HIFU-a group was lower than that of UAE group (10.40% (16/154) vs. 40.70% (48/118), P = 0.00). All patients received the USg-D&C. The HIFU-a group was of less intraoperative blood loss (10.00 (5.00–20.00) vs. 12.50 (5.00–30.00) ml, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in success rates. However, the HIFU-a group was of a shorter duration of postoperative vaginal bleeding (12.00 (9.00–13.00) vs. 14.00 (12.00–15.00) days, P = 0.00). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of subsequent pregnancy rates (P = 0.317). However, the recurrent CSP (rCSP) rate in the HIFU-a group was lower than that in the UAE group (7.70% (6/78) vs. 19.70%(13/66), P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: CSP treated with either HIFU-a or UAE combined with USg-D&C was safe and effective. Although no significant difference was found in the subsequent pregnancy outcomes of the two groups, the rCSP was more common in the UAE group. So, we recommend HIFU-a combined with USg-D&C treatment modality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9890814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98908142023-02-02 Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study Wang, Xi Yang, Bing Chen, Wenzhi Chen, JinYun BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research BACKGROUND: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation (HIFU-a) or uterine artery embolization (UAE) combined with ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage (USg-D&C) was effective. However, there is insufficient comparative research evidence on clinical efficacy and subsequent pregnancy outcomes after previous CSP treatment. This study aims to investigate the efficacy, safety, and subsequent pregnancy outcomes of HIFU-a compared to UAE before USg-D&C for the treatment of CSP. METHODS: Between January 2016 and July 2020, a total of 272 patients received the pretreatment with HIFU-a or UAE(HIFU-a group: n = 118; UAE group: n = 154). The clinical characteristics, treatment success rate, postoperative pregnancy rate and outcome of the two groups were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. After pretreatment, the adverse events rate of HIFU-a group was lower than that of UAE group (10.40% (16/154) vs. 40.70% (48/118), P = 0.00). All patients received the USg-D&C. The HIFU-a group was of less intraoperative blood loss (10.00 (5.00–20.00) vs. 12.50 (5.00–30.00) ml, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in success rates. However, the HIFU-a group was of a shorter duration of postoperative vaginal bleeding (12.00 (9.00–13.00) vs. 14.00 (12.00–15.00) days, P = 0.00). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of subsequent pregnancy rates (P = 0.317). However, the recurrent CSP (rCSP) rate in the HIFU-a group was lower than that in the UAE group (7.70% (6/78) vs. 19.70%(13/66), P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: CSP treated with either HIFU-a or UAE combined with USg-D&C was safe and effective. Although no significant difference was found in the subsequent pregnancy outcomes of the two groups, the rCSP was more common in the UAE group. So, we recommend HIFU-a combined with USg-D&C treatment modality. BioMed Central 2023-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9890814/ /pubmed/36726079 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05376-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wang, Xi
Yang, Bing
Chen, Wenzhi
Chen, JinYun
Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title_full Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title_fullStr Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title_short Clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
title_sort clinical efficacy and re-pregnancy outcomes of patients with previous cesarean scar pregnancy treated with either high-intensity focused ultrasound or uterine artery embolization before ultrasound-guided dilatation and curettage: a retrospective cohort study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726079
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05376-0
work_keys_str_mv AT wangxi clinicalefficacyandrepregnancyoutcomesofpatientswithpreviouscesareanscarpregnancytreatedwitheitherhighintensityfocusedultrasoundoruterinearteryembolizationbeforeultrasoundguideddilatationandcurettagearetrospectivecohortstudy
AT yangbing clinicalefficacyandrepregnancyoutcomesofpatientswithpreviouscesareanscarpregnancytreatedwitheitherhighintensityfocusedultrasoundoruterinearteryembolizationbeforeultrasoundguideddilatationandcurettagearetrospectivecohortstudy
AT chenwenzhi clinicalefficacyandrepregnancyoutcomesofpatientswithpreviouscesareanscarpregnancytreatedwitheitherhighintensityfocusedultrasoundoruterinearteryembolizationbeforeultrasoundguideddilatationandcurettagearetrospectivecohortstudy
AT chenjinyun clinicalefficacyandrepregnancyoutcomesofpatientswithpreviouscesareanscarpregnancytreatedwitheitherhighintensityfocusedultrasoundoruterinearteryembolizationbeforeultrasoundguideddilatationandcurettagearetrospectivecohortstudy