Treatments for cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To report the outcome of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) undergoing treatment.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were women with CSP undergoing treatment. The primary outcome was successful treatment for CSP, defined as no need for additional medical or surgical strategies. Secondary outcomes were the type of additional treatment (surgical or medical), need for blood transfusion, emergency laparotomy, hysterectomy, post-treatment complications.All these outcomes were explored in women undergoing single and compound treatments for CSP. Furthermore, we performed a separate sub-group analysis only including studies which reported on the outcomes of elective treatments. Random effects meta-analyses were used to analyze the data and results reported as pooled proportions or odd ratio (OR).

RESULTS

176 studies (13431 women with CSP undergoing treatment) were included.Successful treatment after primary intervention was achieved in 86.2% (95% CI 82.3-89.7) of women with CSP undergoing treatment with ultrasound guided suction curettage, 72.4% (95% CI 64.8-79.3) with systemic MTX, 81.6% (95% CI 72.3-89.3) with local MTX, 83.9% (95% CI 66.7-95.6) with interventional radiology, 90.42% (95% CI 82.9-96.0) with hysteroscopy, 96.1% (95% CI (92.3-98.6) with laparoscopy and 92.6 with high intensity focused ultrasound (95% CI 78.2-99.6). Post-treatments complications were reported in 3.5% (95% CI 1.7-6.0) of women treated with systemic MTX, 5.9% (95% CI 0.8-15.1) with local MTX or KCl, 1.2% (95% CI 0.1-3.5) with interventional radiology, 1.4% (95% CI 0.4-2.9) with hysteroscopy, 5.5% (95% CI 0.4-25.7) with high intensity focused ultrasound and in none of the cases treated with ultrasound guided suction curettage.When considering compound treatments, successful resolution of CSP was achieved in 91.9% (95% CI 88.0-95.10) of women treated with interventional radiology followed by curettage, 83.3% (95% CI 68.8-93.8) with systemic MTX and curettage, 79.4% (95% CI 56.3-95.2) with local MTX and curettage, 96.2% (95% CI 92.3-98.7) with curettage followed by single or double balloon insertion in the uterine cavity, 98.3% (95% CI 95.9-99.7) with high intensity focused ultrasound followed by curettage, 91.1% (95% CI 3.4-97.0) with interventional radiology followed by removal of CSP with hysteroscopy, 64.3% (95% CI 13.8-99.2) with interventional radiology and systemic MTX and in 95.5% (95% CI 92.9-97.5) with curettage and hysteroscopy.When considering studies reporting a comparison between different treatments, there was no difference between systemic vs local MTX in the primary outcome. Curettage was associated with a higher chance of achieving a successful treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A multitude of treatments for CSP have been reported in the published literature. All treatments described for CSP are apparently equally effective in treating this condition. The findings from this systematic review highlight the need for adopting a common definition and outcome reporting of CSP to better elucidate its natural history, estimate the magnitude of maternal complication after treatment and design appropriately powered RCT to elucidate the optimal treatment of CSP according to its ultrasound phenotype and gestational age at treatment, in terms of effective resolution of the condition and risk of post-intervention complications.