Dilatation and Curettage after Uterine Artery Embolization versus Methotrexate Injection for the Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Single-Center Experience.

Background and Objectives: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) represents a type of ectopic pregnancy in which the embryo implants inside the scar of a previous cesarean section. This condition can lead to maternal morbidity and mortality. The best therapeutic approach in terms of clinical effectiveness and patient safety for CSP has not been described yet, although different therapeutic strategies are currently available. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the success rate of two different treatments in a single institution. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed among patients diagnosed with CSP at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of the "Cannizzaro" Hospital in Catania (University of Enna-Italy) from January 2016 to December 2022. The diagnosis was made by 2D/3D transvaginal ultrasound, following Timor-Tritsch criteria. Two treatment strategies were performed: local and systemic methotrexate (MTX) injection and uterine artery embolization (UAE) with subsequent dilatation and curettage (D&C). All treated women underwent subsequent clinical and sonographic follow-up. Complete recovery was defined as the reduction of ß-HCG values until it was undetectable and the disappearance of the mass in the uterine scar on ultrasound. Results: Nineteen patients were included; nine were in the MTX group and ten were in the UAE + D&C group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of clinical parameters. Treatment was successful in 4 of 10 (44%) patients in the MTX group and 10 of 10 (100%) in the UAE + D&C group (p = 0.01); the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the latter group (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: In our experience, administration of MTX is not recommended as the primary treatment or pre-treatment. Dilatation and curettage after uterine artery embolization are better than methotrexate injection for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy in a single-institution series in terms of complete recovery and length of hospital stay.

Perforated Stress Ulcer of the Duodenum: a Case of an Unexpected Diagnosis in a COVID-19 Patient Following Dilatation and Curettage Procedure.

Background: Stress ulcers in the upper gastrointestinal tract can arise from pathologies related to erosive or inflammatory insults in critically ill patients. The relationship between stressful bodily events and the ischemia and perforation of stress ulcers is poorly understood. Objective: We present a case of perforated stress ulcer following an abortion that was treated by dilatation and curettage (D&C) and complicated by a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Case presentation: A 40-year-old lady presented to the emergency room complaining of diffuse abdominal pain, she was recently diagnosed with an incomplete abortion and managed via a D&C procedure in an external hospital. A computed tomography (CT) scan was done at our center for the abdomen and pelvis, showing extensive pneumoperitoneum, which brought the radiologist's attention to suspect a small bowel perforation presumably accompanying a uterine perforation secondary to the D&C. There were no obvious signs of pelvic small bowel perforation in the initial CT images. The perforated duodenal stress ulcer was diagnosed the next day by a new CT scan following oral contrast ingestion and managed surgically by repair and omental patch, and no other bowel perforations were found upon surgical exploration. After the surgery, the patient was diagnosed with COVID-19, and her clinical status deteriorated gradually during the following week, and she passed away from a cardiac arrest. Conclusion: It is unclear whether septic abortion or COVID-19 has resulted in stress ulcer perforation in our patient. This case report highlights the importance of raising early suspicion in the diagnosis of stress ulcer perforation in critically ill patients to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality.

MRI-based scoring model to predict massive hemorrhage during dilatation and curettage in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To construct a scoring model based on MRI signs to predict massive hemorrhage during dilatation and curettage in cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MRIs of CSP patients admitted to a tertiary referral hospital between February 2020 and July 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The included patients were randomly assigned to the training and validation cohorts. The univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were adopted to identify the independent risk factors for massive hemorrhage (the amount of bleeding ≥ 200 ml) during the dilatation and curettage. A scoring model predicting intraoperative massive hemorrhage was established where each positive independent risk factor was assigned 1 point, and the predictive power of this model was evaluated both in the training and validation cohorts via the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: A total of 187 CSP patients were enrolled, who were divided into the training cohort (31 in 131 patients had massive hemorrhage) and validation cohort (10 in 56 patients had massive hemorrhage). The independent risk factors for intraoperative massive hemorrhage included cesarean section diverticulum area (OR = 6.957, 95% CI 1.993-21.887; P = 0.001), uterine scar thickness (OR = 5.113, 95% CI 2.086-23.829; P = 0.025) and gestational sac diameter (OR = 3.853, 95% CI 1.103-13.530; P = 0.025). A scoring model with a total point of 3 was developed and the CSP patients were divided into low-risk (Total points < 2) and high-risk groups (Total points ≥ 2) for intraoperative massive hemorrhage accordingly. This model possessed high prediction performance both in the training cohort (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.896, 95% CI 0.830-0.942) and validation cohort (AUC = 0.915, 95% CI 0.785-1.000). CONCLUSION: We first constructed a MRI-based scoring model for predicting intraoperative massive hemorrhage in CSP patients, which could help the decision-making of the patients' therapy strategies. Low-risk patients can be cured by D&C alone to reduce the financial burden, while high-risk patients require more adequate preoperative preparation or consideration of changing surgical approaches to reduce bleeding risk.

Management of Acquired Uterine Arteriovenous Malformations Associated with Retained Products of Conception.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different treatments for acquired uterine arteriovenous malformations associated with retained products of conception (UAVM-RPOC) and to investigate the role of uterine artery embolization (UAE) in acquired UAVM-RPOC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients who were diagnosed with uterine arteriovenous malformation by ultrasound after recently terminated pregnancy. Forty-eight patients were included in this study and were divided into 2 groups (major and minor bleeding groups) according to vaginal bleeding. The treatments were analyzed between groups. Technical and clinical success rates of UAE were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 48 patients, 11 patients were in the massive bleeding group and 37 were in the minor bleeding group. Five patients were referred for UAE in each group and UAE was a priority for patients with unstable hemodynamics (chi-square value = 5.524, P =.022). Conservative management, dilation and curettage (D&C), operative hysteroscopy, and UAE were performed in 16 (33%), 18 (38%), 7 (15%), and 13 (27%) patients, respectively. Two patients with ectopic pregnancies suffered uncontrollable bleeding during D&C and required emergent UAE. Three patients underwent UAE before surgery to prevent hemorrhage. The technical and clinical success rates of UAE were 100%. No complications or recurrences occurred. CONCLUSIONS: UAE is a safe and effective treatment for UAVM-RPOC and a priority for patients with unstable hemodynamics. Conservative management, D&C, and hysteroscopy are safe and effective for patients with UAVM-RPOC with stable hemodynamics. However, UAVM-RPOC following ectopic pregnancy may have high risks of massive hemorrhage during procedures.

Comparison of D&C and hysteroscopy after UAE in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy: A case-control study.

ABSTRACT: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) stands for the severe complication secondary to cesarean section, and its incidence shows an increasing trend recently. However, no consensus has been reached about the CSP treatment. This study aims to explore the necessity of hysteroscopy (H/S) after preventive uterine artery embolization (UAE).A case-control report. The childbearing CSP patients with a cesarean section history were evaluated by ultrasonography, with a gestational age of less than 10 weeks. Thirty-four patients receiving dilation and curettage (D&C) after UAE were enrolled into the D&C group, whereas 46 undergoing H/S and curettage after UAE were enrolled into the H/S group.Differences in success rate and decrease in the ß-hCG level in serum on the second day of surgery were not significantly different between D&C and H/S groups (P > .05). Also, differences in side effect rate (except for the anesthesia-related side effects), intraoperative blood loss amount, postoperative bleeding time, and total length of hospital stay were not significant between 2 groups (P > .05). Compared with D&C group, H/S group had decreased postoperative length of hospital stay (P < .05), increased hospitalization cost (P < .05), and significantly elevated time of CSP mass disappearance (P < .05). In addition, 8 (18.19%) patients in H/S group developed anesthesia-related side effects.This study reveals no obvious difference between UAE + D&C and UAE + H/S in terms of the clinical efficacy and safety, except for the time of CSP mass disappearance and anesthesia-related side effects. The hospitalization cost is more expensive for UAE + H/S, but the postoperative length of stay is shorter for UAE + H/S. UAE + H/S is associated with the risk of anesthesia-associated side effects.

Postpartum retained products of conception: Is it possible to avoid postpartum curettage?

OBJECTIVE: Removal of retained products of conception (RPOC) by suction curettage or hysteroscopy may be required in the postpartum period, possibly causing intrauterine adhesions. We investigated whether rates of suction curettage, hysteroscopy, and postoperative intrauterine adhesions have changed over time. METHODS: Parturients considered at risk for RPOC were followed in a specialized postpartum clinic with sequential ultrasound scans. We compared the rates of women requiring surgical procedures for RPOC removal and rates of postoperative intrauterine adhesions between two 2-year periods: 2011-2012 ("early period") and 2016-2017 ("late period"). RESULTS: The overall rates of women requiring a surgical procedure for removal of RPOC did not differ between the early and late periods (38/762 [5.0%] vs 41/732 [5.6%], respectively, P = 0.595). However, removal of RPOC by suction curettage decreased significantly over time whereas removal by hysteroscopy increased (P = 0.022). Intrauterine adhesions were diagnosed in 7 of 38 women (18.4%) who underwent a surgical procedure for RPOC removal in the early period, but none of the patients operated on in the late period developed intrauterine adhesions (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Removal of RPOC in postpartum women may be completed by hysteroscopy in most cases, significantly reducing the need for postpartum curettage and the rates of postoperative intrauterine adhesions.

Impact of anesthetic agents on the amount of bleeding during dilatation and evacuation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients undergo dilatation and evacuation for abortion or miscarriage. However, bleeding is sometimes problematic. Despite reports on the association between volatile anesthetics and increased bleeding during the procedure, firm evidence is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of volatile anesthetics and propofol on the amount of bleeding in patients undergoing dilatation and evacuation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of four databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), from their respective inception to April 2021. Moreover, we searched two trial registration sites. The inclusion criterion was randomized controlled trials of patients who underwent dilatation and evacuation under general anesthesia using volatile anesthetics or propofol. The primary outcome was the amount of perioperative bleeding. The mean difference of the bleeding was combined using a random-effects model. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias with Cochrane domains. We controlled type I and II errors due to sparse data and repetitive testing with Trial Sequential Analysis. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE. RESULTS: Five studies were included in the systematic review. The amount of bleeding was compared in four studies and was higher in the volatile anesthetic group, with a mean difference of 164.7 ml (95% confidence interval, 43.6 to 285.7; p = 0.04). Heterogeneity was considerable, with an I2 value of 97%. Two studies evaluated the incidence of significant bleeding, which was significantly higher in the volatile anesthetic group (RR, 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-5.63; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Choosing propofol over volatile anesthetics during dilatation and evacuation might reduce bleeding and the incidence of excessive bleeding. However, the quality of the evidence was very low. This necessitates further trials with a low risk of bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42019120873).

Identifying the risk factors and incidence of Asherman Syndrome in women with post-abortion uterine curettage.

AIM: To evaluate the risk factors and incidence of Asherman Syndrome in women with post-abortion uterine evacuation and curettage. METHODS: A total of 2546 patients who had surgical abortion (uterine evacuation and curettage) before the 20th gestational week with indications of missed abortion, anembryonic pregnancy, incomplete abortion, and elective curettage in a tertiary antenatal care center were recruited. The patients were called and surveyed for their symptoms; including infertility, oligo-amenorrhea and recurrent pregnancy loss, preterm birth and intrauterine growth retardation and abnormal placentation as criteria of Asherman Syndrome. Diagnostic (office) hysteroscopy was performed for 177 who had one of those complaints. RESULTS: The incidence of Asherman Syndrome was 1.6% (n = 43/2546). History of ≥3 abortions was the main factor that increased the risk of Asherman Syndrome for by 4.6 times. Use of vacuum aspiration or sharp curettage, premedication for cervical priming, and having a pregnancy >10th gestational weeks were not risk factors for Asherman Syndrome. CONCLUSION: When the diagnosis was based on presence of symptoms who underwent uterine instrumentation, the incidence of Asherman Syndrome was found to be 1.6%. Repeated abortions were the main risk factor for Asherman Syndrome and avoiding from repeated uterine instrumentations may have a role in prevention.

Conservatively treated endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia/cancer: Risk of intrauterine synechiae.

INTRODUCTION: To determine whether progestin type or number of dilation and curettage procedures (D&Cs) were associated with intrauterine synechiae (IS) or pregnancy outcomes in patients conservatively treated for endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) or endometrial cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated patients conservatively treated for EIN or EC from 2000 to 2017 at an academic center. IS were identified hysteroscopically. We calculated proportions for categorical variables and tested associations between D&C number, progestin, and pregnancy outcomes using Pearson chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. A post-hoc power analysis indicated sufficient power to detect livebirth. RESULTS: We analyzed 54 patients, 15 with EIN (28 %) and 39 with EC (72 %), with a mean age of 34 ± 1.2 years. Progestin treatment types included megestrol acetate (MA) (n = 24), MA with levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LngIUD) (n = 10), MA followed by LngIUD (n = 3), and LngIUD alone (n = 6). Mean number of D&Cs was 3.9 ± 0.9. Overall, 53 subjects underwent hysteroscopy; 10 (19 %) had IS. When D&Cs were grouped into 0-2, 3-4 and ≥5, each increase in D&C group had a 2.9 higher odds of IS (OR: 2.91, p = 0.04, CI: 1.05-10.02). LngIUD was associated with a nonsignificant 46 % decrease in the odds of IS (OR: 0.54, p = 0.66, CI: 0.08-2.87). Twenty-two women attempted pregnancy; 14 women achieved a total of 20 pregnancies and 9 women had total of 15 livebirths (41 % livebirth rate). The number of D&Cs and progestin treatment type were not associated with pregnancy outcomes. DISCUSSION: Among 54 patients conservatively treated for EC/EIN, nearly 20 % developed IS. However, hysteroscopic and/or fertility treatments may improve pregnancy outcomes.

Reproductive performance of women with and without intrauterine adhesions following recurrent dilatation and curettage for miscarriage: long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Are the long-term reproductive outcomes following recurrent dilatation and curettage (D&C) for miscarriage in women with identified and treated intrauterine adhesions (IUAs) comparable to women without IUAs. SUMMARY ANSWER: Reproductive outcomes in women with identified and treated IUAs following recurrent D&C for miscarriage are impaired compared to women without IUAs; fewer ongoing pregnancies and live births are achieved with a prolonged time to a live birth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The Prevention of Adhesions Post Abortion (PAPA) study showed that application of auto-crosslinked hyaluronic acid (ACP) gel, an absorbable barrier in women undergoing recurrent D&C for miscarriage resulted in a lower rate of IUAs, 13% versus 31% (relative risk 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.83), lower mean adhesion score and significant less moderate to severe IUAs. It is unclear what the impact is of IUAs on long-term reproductive performance. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a follow-up of the PAPA study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the application of ACP gel in women undergoing recurrent D&C for miscarriage. All included women received a diagnostic hysteroscopy 8-12 weeks after randomization to evaluate the uterine cavity and for adhesiolysis if IUAs were present. Here, we present the reproductive outcomes in women with identified and treated IUAs versus women without IUAs, 46 months after randomization. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Between December 2011 and July 2015, 152 women with a first-trimester miscarriage with at least one previous D&C, were randomized for D&C alone or D&C with immediate intrauterine application of ACP gel. Participants were approached at least 30 months after randomization to evaluate reproductive performance, obstetric and neonatal outcomes and cycle characteristics. Additionally, the medical files of all participants were reviewed. Main outcome was ongoing pregnancy. Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies, time to conception and time to live birth were also recorded. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In women pursuing a pregnancy, 14/24 (58%) ongoing pregnancies were recorded in women with identified and treated IUAs versus 80/89 (90%) ongoing pregnancies in women without IUAs odds ratio (OR) 0.18 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.50, P-value <0.001). Documented live birth was also lower in women with IUAs; 13/24 (54%) with versus 75/89 (84%) without IUAs, OR 0.22 (95% CI: 0.08 to-0.59, P-value 0.004). The median time to conception was 7 months in women with identified and treated IUAs versus 5 months in women without IUAs (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.33)) and time to conception leading to a live birth 15 months versus 5.0 months (HR 0.54 (95% CI: 0.30 to 0.97)). In women with identified and treated IUAs, premature deliveries were recorded in 3/16 (19%) versus 4/88 (5%) in women without IUAs, P-value 0.01. Complications were recorded in respectively 12/16 (75%) versus 26/88 (30%), P-value 0.001. No differences were recorded in mean birth weight between the groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the original PAPA study, randomization was applied for ACP gel application. Comparing women with and without IUAs is not in line with the randomization and therefore confounding of the results cannot be excluded. IUAs, if visible during routine hysteroscopy after randomization were removed as part of the study protocol; the influence of IUAs on reproductive outcome may therefore be underestimated. Women undergoing a recurrent D&C for miscarriage were included, a specific group likely to generate clinically significant adhesions. The findings should therefore not be generalized to all women undergoing D&C for miscarriage. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: As IUAs have an impact on reproductive performance, even after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis, primary prevention is essential. Expectative and medical management should therefore be considered as serious alternatives for D&C in women with a miscarriage. In case D&C is necessary, application of ACP gel should be considered. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The original PAPA study (NTR 3120) was an investigator initiated study that was funded by the Foundation for scientific investigation in Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Saint Lucas Andreas Hospital (currently renamed OLVG Oost), SWOGA. The syringes containing ACP gel were received from Anika Therapeutics, the manufacturer of Hyalobarrier® Gel Endo. The current follow-up study was also an investigator-initiated study without funding. The funder and sponsor had no role in the design of this follow-up study, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, trial design, patient recruitment, writing of the report or any aspect pertinent to the study. ABH, RAL, JAFH and JWRT have no conflict to declare. HAMB reports being a member of safety board research Womed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register NTR 3120.

Association Between First-Trimester Bleeding and Retained Placenta Requiring Dilatation and Curettage.

OBJECTIVE: Early subchorionic hemorrhage may lead to a disruption in the placental-uterine matrix, which may result in an adherence of the placenta to the endometrium. We evaluated the effect of a first-trimester bleed on the need for a post-vaginal delivery dilatation and curettage (D&C) for removal of retained placenta. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study at a tertiary care centre between 2012 and 2016. Patients identified through medical records as having required a post-vaginal delivery D&C for retained placenta were considered cases and were matched 1:5 with patients delivering vaginally within 1 week who did not require a D&C. History of first-trimester bleeding and subchorionic hemorrhage were identified through chart review. Conditional logistic regression analyses estimated the effect of a first-trimester bleed on the requirement for D&C for retained placenta. Models were adjusted for maternal age and previous uterine surgery. RESULTS: There were 68 cases of retained placenta requiring D&C, for an estimated 3 in 1000 deliveries. Patients requiring D&C were slightly older than controls but were otherwise comparable with respect to baseline demographic characteristics. In adjusted analyses, patients who required a postpartum D&C were more likely than controls to have had a first-trimester bleed at 11.8% and 0.6%, respectively (OR 25.3; 95% CI 4.7-135.4, P < 0.001). Postpartum D&C for retained placenta was associated with postpartum hemorrhage, need for blood transfusion, and manual removal of placenta. CONCLUSION: First-trimester bleeding should be considered a high-risk determinant for post-vaginal delivery D&C for retained placenta and for severe postpartum hemorrhage.

Unexpected endometrial malacoplakia related to abortion and placental rests retention: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Malacoplakia is a rare chronic inflammatory disease. The name derives from the Greek "µαλακός" meaning "soft" and "πλάξ" meaning "plaque", describing its usual macroscopic presentation as a friable yellow soft plaque. It was first described by von Hansemann in 1901 and by Michaelis and Gutmann in 1902. The urinary system is the most commonly involved site. Female genital tract involvement is extremely rare. Treatment is prevalently based on antibiotics with surgical intervention sometimes necessary. Prognosis is usually good, but relapse may frequently occur. CASE PRESENTATION: This report illustrates the first case of endometrial malacoplakia in a 40 years-old patient who received endometrial curettage due to the retention of placental rests following an abortion. After conspicuous vaginal sero-hematic secretions, the patient received a further curettage. The histological examination did not show any retention of chorionic rests, but an endometrial and myometrial infiltration of histiocytes with large granular cytoplasm within a chronic inflammatory background. Immunoreactivity for CK-pool was negative, while CD68 immunostaining was strongly positive. CONCLUSIONS: Malacoplakia of endometrium is an extremely rare condition, with few cases reported in the whole international literature. In this paper, we present the first case associated to an abortion followed by endometrial curettage procedures. This rare disease should always be attentively examined, considering, among differential diagnoses, uterine neoplasms or physiological conditions such as cumulus of foamy macrophages in the endometrium.

Interventions for non-tubal ectopic pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy is the implantation of an embryo at a site lying outside the uterine cavity or fallopian tubes. Sites include a caesarean scar, the cornua uteri, the ovary, the cervix, and the abdomen. There has been an increasing trend in the occurrence of these rare conditions, especially caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of surgery, medical treatment, and expectant management of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy in terms of fertility outcomes and complications. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) search portal and nine other databases to 12 December 2019. We handsearched reference lists of articles retrieved and contacted experts in the field to obtain additional data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in all languages that examined the effects and safety of surgery, medical treatment, and expectant management of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used Cochrane standard methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were treatment success and complications. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 303 women, all reporting Caesarean scar pregnancy. Two compared uterine arterial embolization (UAE) or uterine arterial chemoembolization (UACE) plus methotrexate (MTX) versus systemic MTX and subsequent dilation and suction curettage; one compared UACE plus MTX versus ultrasonography-guided local MTX injection; and two compared suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus suction curettage under ultrasonography after UAE/UACE. The quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. The main limitations were imprecision (small sample sizes and very wide confidence intervals (CI) for most analyses), multiple comparisons with a small number of trials, and insufficient data available to assess heterogeneity. UAE/UACE versus systemic MTX prior to suction curettage Two studies reported this comparison. One compared UAE with systemic MTX and one compared UACE plus MTX versus systemic MTX, in both cases followed by a suction curettage. We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE improved success rates after initial treatment (UAE: risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.38; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE reduced rates of complications (UAE: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.75; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.48; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE reduced adverse effects (UAE: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 6.11; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.24; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence), and it was not obvious that the types of events had similar values to participants (e.g. fever versus vomiting). Blood loss was lower in UAE/UACE groups than systemic MTX groups (UAE: mean difference (MD) -378.70 mL, 95% CI -401.43 to -355.97; 1 RCT, 72 women; moderate-quality evidence; UACE: MD -879.00 mL, 95% CI -1135.23 to -622.77; 1 RCT, 28 women; moderate-quality evidence). Data were not available on time to normalize ß-human chorionic gonadotropin (ß-hCG). UACE plus MTX versus ultrasonography-guided local MTX injection We are uncertain whether UACE improved success rates after initial treatment (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.60; 1 RCT, 45 women; very low-quality evidence). Adverse effects: the study reported the same number of failed treatments in each arm (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.92; 1 RCT, 45 women). We are uncertain whether UACE shortened the time to normalize ß-hCG (MD 1.50 days, 95% CI -3.16 to 6.16; 1 RCT, 45 women; very low-quality evidence). Data were not available for complications. Suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus under ultrasonography after UAE/UACE. Two studies reported this comparison. One compared suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus under ultrasonography after UAE, and one compared these interventions after UACE. We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy improved success rates after initial treatment (UAE: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.03; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy reduced rates of complications (UAE: RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.47 to 33.91; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.72; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy reduced adverse effects (UAE: RR 3.09, 95% CI 0.12 to 78.70; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: not estimable; 1 RCT, 92 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy shortened the time to normalize ß-hCG (UAE: MD 4.03 days, 95% CI -1.79 to 9.85; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: MD 0.84 days, 95% CI -1.90 to 3.58; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy other than CSP No studies reported on non-tubal ectopic pregnancies in locations other than on a caesarean scar. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For Caesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) it is uncertain whether there is a difference in success rates, complications, or adverse events between UAE/UACE and administration of systemic MTX before suction curettage (low-quality evidence). Blood loss was lower if suction curettage is conducted after UAE/UACE than after administration of systemic MTX (moderate-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in treatment success rates, complications, adverse effects or time to normalize ß-hCG between suction curettage under hysteroscopy and under ultrasonography (very low-quality evidence). There are no studies of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy other than CSP and RCTs for these types of pregnancy are unlikely.

Prior surgical uterine evacuation of pregnancy and infertility: protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prior surgical uterine evacuation is associated with an increased risk of infertility. However, findings are inconsistent, highlighting the need for a clear consensus on the effect of prior surgical uterine evacuation on the risk of infertility. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarise the available evidence examining the association between prior surgical uterine evacuation and the risk of infertility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search of electronic databases (ie, PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE and ScienceDirect) will be conducted since their inception until October 2019 with no limit for language using a detailed prespecified search strategy. Both the authors will independently screen titles and abstracts and select full-text articles, perform data extraction and appraise the quality of included studies using a bias classification tool. Meta-analyses will be performed to calculate the overall pooled estimates using the generic inverse variance method. This systematic review and meta-analysis will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Given that this is a protocol based on published data, there is no requirement for ethics approval. It is anticipated that the dissemination of results will be reported according to the PRISMA statement. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019117266.

Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes 42 months after application of hyaluronic acid gel following dilation and curettage for miscarriage in women who have experienced at least one previous curettage: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study whether intrauterine application of auto-crosslinked polymers of hyaluronic acid (ACP) gel after dilation and curettage (D&C) improves reproductive outcomes. DESIGN: Follow-up of a prospective randomized trial. SETTING: University and university-affiliated teaching hospitals. PATIENT(S): Women with a miscarriage at <14 weeks' gestation with at least one previous D&C were randomized to D&C plus ACP gel (intervention) or D&C alone (control). A hysteroscopy was performed after 8-12 weeks, and if intrauterine adhesion (IUAs) were encountered, adhesiolysis was executed. INTERVENTION(S): Participants received a questionnaire 30 months after treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy and outcome of subsequent pregnancies. RESULT(S): Ongoing pregnancies were recorded in 74.6% (50/67) of the intervention group versus 67.2% (43/64) of the control group, and in, respectively, 94.3% (50/53) versus 71.7% (43/60) in the women wishing to conceive. The median times to conception leading to a live birth were, respectively, 21.9 versus 36.1 months. Reduced menstrual blood loss was reported in 7.5% (5/67) versus 20.3% (13/64) and dysmenorrhea in 14.9% (10/67) versus 34.4% (22/64), respectively. CONCLUSION(S): Application of ACP gel following D&C performed after miscarriage seems to have a favorable effect on subsequent reproductive outcomes in women with at least one previous D&C. Given the fact that the study was not powered for reproductive outcomes, the data should be interpreted with caution. The effect may be underestimated due to routine removal of IUAs. DUTCH CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: NTR 3120.

Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance During Curettage After Second-Trimester Delivery is Associated With a Higher Rate of Complications.

OBJECTIVE: The use of intraoperative ultrasound guidance for second-trimester elective dilation and curettage reduces the incidence of uterine perforation. However, the role of intraoperative ultrasound guidance during curettage following second-trimester delivery has not been evaluated. We aim to evaluate the effect of intraoperative ultrasound guidance during curettage following second-trimester delivery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included patients who had a second-trimester delivery at up to 236/7 weeks gestation and underwent uterine curettage after the fetus was delivered. RESULTS: Overall, 273 patients were included. Of them, 194 (71%) underwent curettage without intraoperative ultrasound guidance, while 79 (29%) underwent the procedure utilizing intraoperative ultrasound guidance. The overall rate of a composite adverse outcome was higher among those undergoing curettage under intraoperative ultrasound guidance compared with no ultrasound guidance (31 [39.2%] vs. 40 [20.6%]; OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.4-4.4, P = 0.002). Placental morbidity (10 [12.6%] vs. 11 [5.6%]; OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.01-5.9, P = 0.04) and infectious complications (6 [7.5%] vs. 5 [2.5%]; OR 3.1; 95% CI 1.01-10.4, P = 0.05) were more frequent among those undergoing curettage with intraoperative ultrasound guidance. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, intraoperative ultrasound guidance was the only independent factor positively associated with the occurrence of an adverse outcome (adjusted OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.1-3.4, P = 0.02). Procedure time was longer when ultrasound guidance was used (9:52 vs. 6:58 min:s; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Intraoperative ultrasound guidance during curettage after second-trimester delivery is associated with a higher complication rate than no guidance.