[1]谭廷廷,孙秋蕾,罗莉,等.剖宫产瘢痕妊娠患者经子宫动脉栓塞化疗联合清宫术治疗后再妊娠临床分析[J].第三军医大学学报,2019,41(17):1672-1676.
 TAN Tingting,SUN Qiulei,LUO Li,et al.Reproductive outcomes of women with cesarean scar pregnancy after uterine artery chemoembolization combined with evacuation[J].J Third Mil Med Univ,2019,41(17):1672-1676.
点击复制

剖宫产瘢痕妊娠患者经子宫动脉栓塞化疗联合清宫术治疗后再妊娠临床分析(/HTML )
分享到:

《第三军医大学学报》[ISSN:1000-5404/CN:51-1095/R]

卷:
41卷
期数:
2019年第17期
页码:
1672-1676
栏目:
临床医学
出版日期:
2019-09-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Reproductive outcomes of women with cesarean scar pregnancy after uterine artery chemoembolization combined with evacuation
作者:
谭廷廷孙秋蕾罗莉熊希项锦红颜苹高春燕陈正琼
400037 重庆,陆军军医大学(第三军医大学)第二附属医院妇产科
Author(s):
TAN Tingting SUN Qiulei LUO Li XIONG Xi XIANG Jinhong YAN Ping GAO Chunyan CHEN Zhengqiong

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, 400037, China

关键词:
剖宫产瘢痕妊娠子宫动脉栓塞化疗再次妊娠复发性剖宫产瘢痕妊娠
Keywords:
cesarean scar pregnancy uterine artery chemoembolization reproductive outcome recurrent cesarean scar pregnancy
分类号:
R619.6; R714.1; R714.22
文献标志码:
A
摘要:

目的回顾性分析子宫动脉栓塞化疗(uterine artery chemoembolization,UACE)联合清宫术治疗后,剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(cesarean scar pregnancy,CSP)患者再次妊娠情况,探索复发性剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(recurrent cesarean scar pregnancy, RCSP)发病的影响因素。方法收集2010年1月至2017年12月于我院诊断为CSP并接受UACE联合清宫术治疗的患者病例资料及随访信息,分析其再次妊娠情况,并对比正常宫内妊娠和RCSP的临床和超声影像学特点。结果有随访资料的396例患者中,118例(29.8%)术后有妊娠计划,96例成功妊娠,妊娠次数104次(88.1%);其中正常妊娠生产62人次(59.6%),RCSP 26人次(25.0%)。278例(70.2%)患者术后无妊娠计划,42例患者再次妊娠,妊娠次数47人次(16.9%);其中正常妊娠生产2人次(4.3%),RCSP 6人次(12.7%)。在所有妊娠中,RCSP的发生率达21.2%(32/151)。RCSP组患者流产次数较正常宫内妊娠组多(P=0.029),前次CSP妊娠孕龄较正常宫内妊娠组大(P=0.020),子宫下段剩余肌层厚度较正常宫内组薄(P=0.010)。结论CSP患者经UACE联合清宫术治疗后可再次妊娠。CSP术后再次妊娠易形成RCSP。患者流产次数、前次CSP孕龄和子宫下段剩余肌层厚度与RCSP发生相关。

Abstract:

ObjectiveTo retrospectively analyze the reproductive outcome of patients after undergoing uterine artery chemoembolization (UACE) due to cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), and to explore the risk factors for CSP. MethodsThe clinical data and follow-up information were retrospectively collected from the women who had diagnosed with CSPs and treated by UACE combined with evacuation in our hospital between January 2010 and December 2017. Their conditions of pregnancy and reproductive outcome were analyzed. The clinical manifestations and ultrasonographic features were compared between these pregnant women and those with normal pregnancy. ResultsOf the 396 cases with follow-up data, 118 cases (29.8%) wished to give a birth again and finally 96 cases (88.1%) were successfully pregnant, with a total of 104 pregnancies. Among them, 62 pregnancies (59.6%) were intrauterine pregnancy while 26 pregnancies (25.0%) were RCSP. Although 278 cases (70.2%) had no pregnancy plans, there were 42 cases (16.9%) having subsequent pregnancies, with a total of 47 pregnancies. Among them, 2 pregnancies (4.3%) were intrauterine pregnancy while 6 pregnancies (12.7%) were RCSP. In all pregnancies, the incidence of RCSP was 21.2% (32/151). Between the intrauterine pregnancy and RCSP groups, the latter group had older gestational age (P=0.020),  thinner remnant myometrial thickness of lower uterine segment of previous CSP (P=0.010) and larger times of abortion (P=0.029). ConclusionWomen with CSP could be pregnant again after UACE combined with evacuation. It is apt to form RCSP in the subsequent pregnancy after the previous CSP. The gestational age and the remnant myometrial thickness of lower uterine segment of the previous CSP and the number of abortions are associated with RCSP.
 

参考文献/References:

[1]ROTAS M A, HABERMAN S, LEVGUR M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2006, 107(6): 1373-1381. DOI:10.1097/01.AOG.0000218690.24494.ce.
[2]KANAT-PEKTAS M, BODUR S, DUNDAR O, et al. Systematic review: What is the best first-line approach for cesarean section ectopic pregnancy?[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 55(2): 263-269. DOI:10.1016/j.tjog.2015.03.009.
[3]BIRCH PETERSEN K,HOFFMANN E,RIFBJERG LARSEN C, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies[J]. Fertil Steril, 2016, 105(4): 958-967. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.12.130.
[4]LI Y, WANG W W, YANG T, et al. Incorporating uterine artery embolization in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy following diagnostic ultrasonography[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2016, 134(2): 202-207. DOI:10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.12.006.
[5]RASHID S, KHAUND A, MURRAY L S, et al. The effects of uterine artery embolisation and surgical treatment on ovarian function in women with uterine fibroids[J]. BJOG, 2010, 117(8): 985-989. DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02579.x.
[6]MCLUCAS B, VOORHEES W D 3rd, ELLIOTT S. Fertility after uterine artery embolization: a review[J]. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol, 2016, 25(1): 1-7. DOI:10.3109/13645706.2015.1074082.
[7]GONZALEZ N, TULANDI T. Cesarean scar pregnancy: A systematic review[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2017, 24(5): 731-738. DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2017.02.020.
[8]HOLLAND M G, BIENSTOCK J L. Recurrent ectopic pregnancy in a cesarean scar[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 111(2 Pt 2): 541-545. DOI:10.1097/01.AOG.0000287295.39149.bd.
[9]WANG Q, PENG H L, HE L, et al. Reproductive outcomes after previous cesarean scar pregnancy: Follow up of 189 women[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 54(5): 551-553. DOI:10.1016/j.tjog.2015.08.006.
[10]GAO L F, HUANG Z W, ZHANG X, et al. Reproductive outcomes following cesarean scar pregnancy-a case series and review of the literature[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2016, 200: 102-107. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.02.039.
[11]JURKOVIC D, HILLABY K, WOELFER B, et al. First-trimester diagnosis and management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment Cesarean section scar[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2003, 21(3): 220-227. DOI:10.1002/uog.56.
[12]SUN Q L, WU X H, LUO L, et al. Characteristics of women with mixed mass formation after evacuation following uterine artery chemoembolization for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2018, 297(4): 1059-1066. DOI:10.1007/s00404-018-4716-6.
[13]ADLER D D, CARSON P L, RUBIN J M, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16(6): 553-559.
[14]CHEN L X, XIAO S S, ZHU X G, et al. Analysis of the reproductive outcome of patients with cesarean scar pregnancy treated by high-intensity focused ultrasound and uterine artery embolization: A retrospective cohort study[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2019, 26(5): 883-890. DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2018.09.001.
[15]LI Y, LU L J, WANG W X, et al. Retrospective study of patients with cesarean scar pregnancies treated by uterine artery chemoembolization and curettage[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2018, 143(2): 172-177. DOI:10.1002/ijgo.12636.
[16]QIAN Z D, GUO Q Y, HUANG L L. Identifying risk factors for recurrent cesarean scar pregnancy: a case-control study[J]. Fertil Steril, 2014, 102(1): 129-134.e1. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.04.003.

更新日期/Last Update: 2019-09-09