A Comparison of Treatment Options for Type 1 and Type 2 Caesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Retrospective Case Series Study.

Background: There is currently no agreement on the optimal management of caesarean scar pregnancy. Caesarean scar pregnancy is currently categorised into two subtypes according to the site of implantation. This may consequently result in the difference in treatment options. However, the comparison of the success rate of each treatment option according to the subtypes has not been fully investigated. Methods: 71 patients who were treated by uterine curettage (D and C), or uterine artery embolization with curettage (UAE) or hysteroscopy in conjunction with laparoscopy between January 2016 and March 2020 were included. Data on maternal age, gestational sac age, the sac diameter, the interval between two pregnancies, the number of previous caesarean sections, amount of bleeding and ß-hCG levels were collected and analysed dependent on the subtypes. Results: There was no difference in the clinical parameters of the cases who received different options of treatment, as well as no difference in the clinical parameters between type 1 and type 2 caesarean scar pregnancy. The primary success rate for type 1 caesarean scar pregnancy by D and C, or UAE, or hysteroscopy in conjunction with laparoscopy was 95, or 100 or 100%, respectively. The primary success rate for type 2 caesarean scar pregnancy by D and C, or UAE, or hysteroscopy in conjunction with laparoscopy was 27, or 67, or 95% respectively. Conclusion: Our data demonstrates that hysteroscopy in conjunction with laparoscopy for type 2 caesarean scar pregnancy was the most successful compared to other options, but for type 1 caesarean scar pregnancy, D and C could be the cost-effective option.

Pituitrin local injection versus uterine artery embolization in the management of cesarean scar pregnancy: A retrospective cohort study.

AIM: To compare the effect of pituitrin local injection (PIT) and uterine artery embolization (UAE) as pretreatment before surgery during the management of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). METHODS: Forty-nine CSP patients diagnosed in our department of Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital from October 2017 to October 2019. All patients underwent hysteroscopy and negative pressure aspiration (for type I CSP) or laparoscopic wedge-resection (for type II and III CSP) following one of the preoperative treatments: PIT group (n = 26) and UAE group (n = 23). The baseline clinical data, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative hospital stay, hospitalization expenses, postoperative pain, postoperative fever, postoperative serum ß-human chorionic gonadotropin (ß-hCG) level, and pregnancy outcome were reviewed and analyzed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (p ≥ 0.05) between two groups in baseline characteristics including age, gravidity, previous cesarean section times, interval since last cesarean delivery, menolipsis time, maximum diameter of gestational sac or mass under ultrasound, fetal cardiac activity and preoperative ß-hCG level. There was no significant difference in blood loss, transfusion rate, and postoperative ß-hCG reduction percentage (p ≥ 0.05) either. The postoperative hospital stay, hospitalization expenses, postoperative pain, and postoperative fever rate in PIT group were significantly lower than those in UAE group (p < 0.05). Moreover, ß-hCG level of all patients turned negative 1 month after surgery successfully. CONCLUSIONS: PIT pretreatment seems to be a same effective, more economical, and with fewer side effects pretreatment method compared to traditional UAE pretreatment in the management of CSP.

A pilot study on investigating the role of Salvia miltiorrhiza in fetal growth restriction.

To date there is no effective treatment for pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction (FGR). Salvia miltiorrhiza, a traditional Chinese herb has been shown to promote blood flow and improve microcirculatory disturbance. In this pilot study, we evaluated whether S. miltiorrhiza can potentially become a possible therapy for FGR. Nineteen pregnant women with FGR were treated with S. miltiorrhiza and ATP supplementation for an average of 7 days, and 17 cases received ATP supplementation as controls. The estimated fetal weights (EFWs) were measured by ultrasound after treatment, and the birthweights were recorded after birth. After treatment with S. miltiorrhiza, 7 (37%) FGR cases showed an increase in EFW to above the 10th percentile, compared with 4 (23%) FGR cases in controls (odds ratio: 1.896, 95% confidence limits (CLs): 0.44-8.144). At delivery, 10 (53%) FGR cases in the treatment group delivered babies with a birthweight above the 10th percentile, compared with 6 (35%) FGR cases in the control group (odds ratio: 2.037, 95% CL: 0.532-7.793); 80 or 64% FGR cases in the treatment group showed an increase in fetal abdominal circumference (AC) or biparietal diameter (BPD) above the 10th percentile before delivery. While 44 or 30% FGR cases in the control group showed an increase in AC or BPD. No improvement of head circumference (HC) or femur length (FL) was seen. These pilot data suggest the need for multicenter randomized clinical trials on the potential of S. miltiorrhiza to improve perinatal outcome in pregnant women complicated by FGR.