Working Languages
How to Cite
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the treatment outcomes of cesarean scar pregnancy women (CSP) treated at Hai Phong Hospital of OB&GYN in 2022 - 2023 and assess some related factors to propose a disease prognosis model.
Materials and Methods: A descriptive case series study was conducted on 120 patients diagnosed with CSP and treated at Hai Phong Hospital of OB&GYN from June 1, 2022, to May 30, 2023. Statistical tests included the Chisquare test, mean comparison using Oneway ANOVA, and logistic regression correlation assessment.
Results: CSP had minimal symptoms, with uterine isthmus bulging observed in 42.5% of cases; 67.5% exhibited vascular proliferation; and 24.2% had an RMT (Residual Myometrial Thickness) of less than 2mm. The risk of RMT less than 2 mm increased with three or more cesarean sections and COS 1 (OR 3.0 - 3.6, p < 0.05). The treatment success rate was high, with uterine evacuation being the most commonly applied method (96.9% success rate), followed by vascular embolization and uterine endoscopy (93.8% success rate). COS 1, vascular proliferation, GS, and RMT were identified as risk factors for hemorrhage prognosis.
Conclusions: CSP does not present with specific symptoms. Uterine evacuation and vascular intervention combined with endoscopy provide significant treatment efficacy, and GS and RMT are valuable for predicting hemorrhage risk.
Keywords
References
pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound
Obstet. Gynecol. Feb. 2018, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 169–175, doi: 10.1002/uog.17568.
2. O. Grechukhina, U. Deshmukh, L. Fan et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy, incidence,
and recurrence: Five-year experience at a single tertiary care referral center. Obstet.
Gynecol. 2018, vol. 132, no. 5, pp. 1285–1295, doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002940.
3. I. E. Timor-Tritsch and A. Monteagudo. Unforeseen consequences of the increasing
rate of cesarean deliveries: Early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A
review. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 14–29, doi:
10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.007.
4. R. Miller, I. E. Timor-Tritsch, C. Gyamfi-Bannerman. The society for maternal-fetal
medicine consult series #49 on cesarean scar pregnancy. Contemp. Ob. Gyn. 2020, vol.
65, no. 6, pp. 18–25.
5. G. Cali, F. Forlani, I. E. Timor-Tritsch et al. Natural history of Cesarean scar
pregnancy on prenatal ultrasound: the crossover sign. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol.
2017, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 100–104, doi: 10.1002/uog.16216.
6. Y. Lin, C. Xiong, C. Dong, and J. Yu. Approaches in the Treatment of Cesarean Scar
Pregnancy and Risk Factors for Intraoperative Hemorrhage: A Retrospective Study.
Front. Med., Jun. 2021, vol. 8, p. 682368, doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.682368.
7. Y. Ban, J. Shen, X. Wang et al. Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy Clinical
Classification System With Recommended Surgical Strategy. Obstet. Gynecol. 2023,
vol. 141, no. 5, pp. 927-936.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005113.
8. I. E. Timor-Tritsch, A. Monteagudo, G Calì et al. Hidden in plain sight: role of
residual myometrial thickness to predict outcome of Cesarean scar pregnancy.
Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. Nov. 2023, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 624–632, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.26246.
9. Vikhareva Osser O, Valentin L. Risk factors for incomplete healing of the uterine
incision after caesarean section. BJOG 2010, vol. 117, pp. 1119–1126.
10. A. Kaelin Agten, G. Cali, A. Monteagudo et al. The clinical outcome of cesarean
scar pregnancies implanted ‘on the scar’ versus ‘in the niche. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.
2017, vol. 216, no. 5, pp. 510.e1-510.e6, doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.019.
11. D. M. Twickler, M J Lucas, A B Balis, et al. Color flow mapping for myometrial
invasion in women with a prior cesarean delivery. J. Matern. Fetal. Med. 2000, vol. 9,
no. 6, pp. 330–335, doi: 10.1002/1520-6661(200011/12)9:6<330::AID-
MFM1002>3.0.CO;2-O.
12. G. Younes, Y. Goldberg, Y. Segev et al. Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Case Series of
Diagnosis, Treatment, and Results. J. Diagnostic Med. Sonogr. 2018, vol. 34, no. 6, pp.
502–508, doi: 10.1177/8756479318791155.
13. Lê Thị Hoàn. Nghiên cứu chẩn đoán và xử trí chửa tại vết mổ lấy thai tại Bệnh viện
Phụ Sản Hải Phòng. Luận văn thạc sỹ. Trường Đại Học Dược Hải Phòng, 2017.
14. Trịnh Thị Nhung. Nghiên cứu đặc điểm lâm sàng, cận lâm sàng và kết quả điều trị
chửa ở sẹo mổ lấy thai tại Bệnh viện Phụ sản Trung ương. Khóa Luận Tốt Nghiệp Đại
học Ngành Y Đa Khoa, Đại Học Quốc Gia Hà Nội. 2020.
15. Nguyễn Công Định. Đánh giá hiệu quả điều trị thai ở sẹo mổ đẻ tại Bệnh viện Phụ
Sản Hà Nội từ 09/2017 - 09/2018. Luận Văn Bác Sĩ Chuyên Khoa II Trường Đại Học
Hà Nội, 2018.
16. I. E. Timor-Tritsch, A. Monteagudo, R. Santos et al. The diagnosis, treatment, and
follow-up of cesarean scar pregnancy. Am J Obs. Gynecol 2012, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 44
1–44 13.
17. B. Qiao, Z. Zhang, Y. Li et al. Uterine Artery Embolization Versus Methotrexate for
Cesarean Scar Pregnancy in a Chinese Population: A Meta-analysis. J. Minim. Invasive
Gynecol. 2016, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 1040–1048, doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.08.819.
18. Jie Ou, Ping Peng, Chunying Li et al. Assessment of the necessity of uterine artery
embolization during suction and curettage for caesarean scar pregnancy: a prospective
cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2020, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 378.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Downloads
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Thi Thuy Duong Nguyen, Danh Cuong Tran, Thi Tu Anh Tran, Description of fetal abnormalities in IVF pregnancies at the Prenatal Diagnosis Center of the National Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Vietnam Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology: Vol. 19 No. 4 (2021)
- Thu Huyen Le, Thi Tu Anh Tran, Thi Thao Vu, Thanh Huyen Do, Thi Thu Hang Dinh, Maternal satisfaction with post-cesarean care at the National Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Vietnam Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology: Vol. 22 No. 4 (2024): Scientific Congress Supplement: The 24ᵗʰ Vietnam - France Conference on Obstetrics and Gynecology