Surgical treatment and reproductive outcomes in caesarean scar pregnancy at a single center.

BACKGROUND: To investigate factors associated with different reproductive outcomes in patients with Caesarean scar pregnancies (CSPs). METHODS: Between May 2017 and July 2022, 549 patients underwent ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration and laparoscopic scar repair at the Gynaecology Department of Hubei Maternal and Child Health Hospital. Ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration was performed in patients with type I and II CSPs, and laparoscopic scar repair was performed in patients with type III CSP. The reproductive outcomes of 100 patients with fertility needs were followed up and compared between the groups. RESULTS: Of 100 patients, 43% had live births (43/100), 19% had abortions (19/100), 38% had secondary infertility (38/100), 15% had recurrent CSPs (RCSPs) (15/100). The reproductive outcomes of patients with CSPs after surgical treatment were not correlated with age, body mass index, time of gestation, yields, abortions, Caesarean sections, length of hospital stay, weeks of menopause during treatment, maximum diameter of the gestational sac, thickness of the remaining muscle layer of the uterine scar, type of CSP, surgical method, uterine artery embolisation during treatment, major bleeding, or presence of uterine adhesions after surgery. Abortion after treatment was the only risk factor affecting RCSPs (odds ratio 11.25, 95% confidence interval, 3.302-38.325; P < 0.01) and it had a certain predictive value for RCSP occurrence (area under the curve, 0.741). CONCLUSIONS: The recurrence probability of CSPs was low, and women with childbearing intentions after CSPs should be encouraged to become pregnant again. Abortion after CSP is a risk factor for RCSP. No significant difference in reproductive outcomes was observed between the patients who underwent ultrasound-guided uterine aspiration and those who underwent laparoscopic scar repair for CSP.

Repair of a chronic myometrial defect with successful pregnancy outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To surgically demonstrate preconceptional laparoscopic repair of a chronic myometrial defect with mesh reinforcement, resulting in a successful pregnancy outcome. DESIGN: Video case report. The Institutional Ethical Committee was consulted, and the requirement for approval was waived because the video describes a modified surgical technique. The patient included in this video gave consent for publication of the video and posting of the video online, including on social media, the journal website, scientific literature websites (such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and others), and other applicable sites. SETTING: A referral advanced gynecological endoscopy center. PATIENT: A 27-year-old woman (P0A1) was diagnosed with myomas during pregnancy, resulting in miscarriage at 22 weeks. Laparotomy and myomectomy were performed 2 months later, and three 8-cm myomas were removed. The endometrial cavity opened posteriorly during surgery, and retained products of conceptions were removed. Periconceptional imaging done after two years showed few intramural myomas and a deficient myometrium in the posterior fundal region. Laparoscopy revealed a defect in the posterior fundal aspect of the uterus with leakage of dye, which was converted to laparotomy and myomectomy with the repair of the myometrial defect. After 1 year, follow-up magnetic resonance imaging showed thinned-out posterior myometrium with a focal area of absent myometrium in the midline and endometrial prolapse. The patient was advised on surrogacy, but she wanted to repair the defect again and try for pregnancy, so she was referred to our center. With the background of a few case reports using mesh to reinforce myometrial repair (1, 2), we counseled the patient about the myometrial repair with the additional use of mesh as an off-label use. INTERVENTION: The risk of uterine rupture after myomectomy is rare (<1%) (3), but it is a severe complication. High-risk cases, like significant myometrial defects or previous ruptures, may require surgical correction. Native repair may not achieve optimal results in all cases. Alternative approaches, like the additional use of mesh or biological materials, have been reported (4). In this case, we demonstrate the use of dual mesh for scar repair. Synthetic mesh over the uterus is used in laparoscopic procedures like sacrohysteropexy and cerclage. We used Parietex (Covidien, New Haven, CT, USA) mesh, a composite macroporous polyester mesh usually used for ventral hernia repair. It has an outer hydrophilic, absorbable collagen barrier that reduces adhesion formation. Laparoscopically, after adhesiolysis, a significant defect was demonstrated on the posterior wall of the uterus (Fig. 1). A complete resection of the fibrotic tissue along the edges of the scar defect was done to expose healthy myometrium. Myometrium was repaired in two layers, excluding the endometrium, with a V-Loc (Covidien, Dublin, Ireland) No. 1-0 suture. Parietex mesh was sutured over the repaired posterior myometrium to reinforce it (Fig. 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The postoperative myometrial thickness on imaging and pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: Postoperative ultrasound scan after 6 weeks demonstrated restoration of posterior wall myometrial thickness of 14 mm. The patient was conceived through in vitro fertilization techniques 4 months after surgery. Antenatal follow-up was uneventful except for suspicion of posterior placenta accreta. She underwent an elective cesarean section with uterine artery embolization at 34 weeks and delivered a healthy infant weighing 1,950 g. Placental removal was uneventful. On inspection, the posterior surface of the uterus was intact without dehiscence, meshing in situ with minimal adhesions (Fig. 3). CONCLUSION: Myometrial scar defects can cause potential obstetric complications. Native repair of scar defects may not achieve optimal results, as in our case. Mesh repair of myomectomy scar defects can be used as an alternative approach, as exemplified in this case. However, further studies are required to establish the safety and efficacy of this approach.