Cao Shanshan, Qiu Guijing, Zhang Peipei, Wang Xinyan, Wu Qing
Tiantai People's Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Taizhou, China.
Department of Gynecology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Jun 22;8:654956. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.654956. eCollection 2021.
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. We conducted a retrospective study that included 87 patients diagnosed with CSP II and treated by performing UAE in combination with curettage and hysteroscopy ( = 53), or TRR ( = 34). Clinical data and outcomes were analyzed. UAE and TRR groups exhibited similar success rates. The TRR group had significantly lower complication rates (30.19 vs. 8.82%, < 0.05) and lower total costs (13,765.89 ± 2,029.12 vs. 9,063.82 ± 954.67, < 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. 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.
对于Ⅱ型剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSPⅡ),目前尚无标准化治疗方案的共识。本研究的目的是评估经阴道切除并修复子宫缺损(TRR)治疗CSPⅡ的疗效和安全性,并与子宫动脉栓塞术(UAE)联合刮宫术的疗效、安全性及成本进行比较。我们进行了一项回顾性研究,纳入了87例诊断为CSPⅡ并接受UAE联合刮宫术及宫腔镜检查(n = 53)或TRR(n = 34)治疗的患者。对临床数据和结果进行了分析。UAE组和TRR组的成功率相似。TRR组的并发症发生率显著低于UAE组(30.19%对8.82%,P < 0.05),总成本也更低(13,765.89±2,029.12对9,063.82±954.67,P < 0.05)。TRR术后子宫下段前壁肌层相对较厚,且无患者发生复发性CSPⅡ。TRR组足月分娩且未发生子宫破裂的患者比例为88.24%(30/34),有4例患者未能妊娠。对于CSPⅡ患者,TRR是一种安全有效的治疗方法,且具有很高的成本效益,尤其适用于有未来生育愿望的患者。