Pseudoaneurysm of the uterine artery post loop electrosurgical excision procedure.

BACKGROUND: The formation of a uterine artery pseudoaneurysm is rare and isolated cases have been reported in the existing literature following caesarean sections, curettages and cone biopsies. There has been no report of pseudoaneurysm formation following a loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Vaginal bleeding could potentially be life threatening if this diagnosis is not considered following cervical instrumentation or surgery. Management options range from haemostatic sutures, image-guided embolisation to surgical repair. We report the diagnosis and management of a case of uterine artery pseudoaneurysm after a loop electrosurgical excision procedure. CASE PRESENTATION: A 37-year-old woman was diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) and underwent a therapeutic loop electrosurgical excision procedure. One month after the procedure, the patient presented to the emergency department with repeated episodes of sudden-onset heavy vaginal bleeding associated with hypotension and syncope. A computed tomography angiogram was performed, which demonstrated a pseudoaneurysm of the right uterine artery. Following the diagnosis, image-guided embolisation was performed successfully. Post-embolisation angiograms showed successful embolisation of the pseudoaneurysm and the patient had no further episodes of bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Loop electrosurgical excision procedures are generally safe but rarely, can be complicated by the formation of uterine artery pseudoaneurysms. The depth of the loop electrosurgical excision procedure and vascular anatomy should be considered to prevent such complications. A computed tomography angiogram appears to be ideal for diagnosis. Image-guided embolisation is safe and effective as a therapeutic measure, with minimal morbidity.

MEchanical DIlatation of the Cervix-- in a Scarred uterus (MEDICS): the study protocol of a randomised controlled trial comparing a single cervical catheter balloon and prostaglandin PGE2 for cervical ripening and labour induction following caesarean delivery.

INTRODUCTION: Labour induction in women with a previous caesarean delivery currently uses vaginal prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), which carries the risks of uterine hyperstimulation and scar rupture. We aim to compare the efficacy of mechanical labour induction using a transcervically applied Foley catheter balloon (FCB) with PGE2 in affected women attempting trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-centre non-inferiority prospective, randomised, open, blinded-endpoint study conducted at an academic maternity unit in Singapore will recruit a total of 100 women with one previous uncomplicated caesarean section and no contraindications to vaginal delivery. Eligible consented participants with term singleton pregnancies and unfavourable cervical scores (≤5) requiring labour induction undergo stratified randomisation based on parity and are assigned either FCB (n=50) or PGE2 (n=50). Treatments are applied for up to 12 hours with serial monitoring of the mother and the fetus and serial assessment for improved cervical scores. If the cervix is still unfavourable, participants are allowed a further 12 hours' observation for cervical ripening. Active labour is initiated by amniotomy at cervical scores of ≥6. The primary outcome is the rate of change in the cervical score, and secondary outcomes include active labour within 24 hours of induction, vaginal delivery, time-to-delivery interval and uterine hyperstimulation. All analyses will be intention-to-treat. The data generated in this trial may guide a change in practice towards mechanical labour induction if this proves efficient and safer for women attempting TOLAC compared with PGE2, to improve labour management in this high-risk population. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is granted by the Domain Specific Review Board (Domain D) of the National Healthcare Group, Singapore. All adverse events will be reported within 24 hours of notification for assessment of causality. Data will be published and will be available for future meta-analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03471858; Pre-results.