Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 48 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 244 - 252 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5798/dicletip.944332 İndeks Tarihi: 24-11-2021

The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy

Öz:
Objective: This study aims to evaluate reproductive and pregnancy outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) treated by suction curettage. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 85 patients with CSP treated by suction curettage in a university hospital between 2013-2017. Reproductive status of the patients who could be reached by phone was inquired at 6-month intervals for three years. Results: Hospital records and telephone follow-up data of the 44 patients who completed follow-up were analyzed. Nineteen patients did not desire pregnancy, while 25 patients reported wishing to conceive again. Twenty-three of these patients (92%, 23/25) conceived spontaneously, 2 of them (8%, 2/25) unable to conceive due to unexplained secondary infertility. Mean length of time from CSP to subsequent pregnancy was 12.3 months (range 2-36 months). Of these pregnancies, 11 (47.8%, 11/23) resulted in birth without any obstetrical problems. Six patients (26%, 6/23) experienced miscarriage, and three patients (13%, 3/23) recurrent cesarean scar pregnancies. Two patients (8.6%, 2/23) had abnormal placental invasion and one patient (4.3%, 1/23) tubal ectopic pregnancy. The live birth rate among the pregnancies was 52.1% (12/23). Conclusion: There is no consensus on the primary treatment regarding the reproductive outcomes. Suction curettage is a successful, reliable, inexpensive and easily applicable treatment when appropriate patients are selected. Furthermore, it has a minimal negative effect on fertility, so it can be considered as a first-line treatment option in patients who wish to have children in the future.
Anahtar Kelime:

Sezaryen skar gebeliğinde aspirasyon küretajın üreme sonuçları üzerine etkisi

Öz:
Amaç: Bu çalışma, aspirasyon küretaj yöntemi ile tedavi edilen sezaryen skar gebeliklerinde üreme ve gebelik sonuçlarını değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yöntemler: Bu geriye dönük gözlemsel çalışmaya 2013-2017 yılları arasında Gaziantep Üniversite Hastanesinde sezaryen skar gebeliği nedeniyle aspirasyon küretaj yöntemi ile tedavi edilen 85 hasta dahil edildi. Hastaların üreme durumları 3 yıl boyunca, altı aylık periyodlarla telefonla aranarak sorgulandı. Bulgular: Takibi tamamlanan 44 hastanın hastane kayıtları ve telefon takip verileri incelendi. On dokuz hasta gebelik istemediğini belirtirken, 25 hasta tekrar gebe kalmak istediğini bildirdi. Bu hastaların 23'ü (%92, 23/25) kendiliğinden gebe kaldı, 2' si (%8, 2/25) açıklanamayan sekonder infertilite nedeniyle gebe kalamadı. Sezaryen skar gebeliği tedavisinden sonra tekrar gebe kalıncaya kadar geçen ortalama süre 12.3 aydı (dağılım 2-36 ay). Bu gebeliklerden 11' i (%47,8, 11/23) herhangi bir obstetrik problem olmaksızın doğumla sonuçlandı. Altı hastanın gebeliği (%26, 6/23) düşükle, üç hastanın gebeliği (%13, 3/23) tekrarlayan sezaryen skar gebeliği ile sonuçlandı. İki hastada (%8.6, 2/23) anormal plasental invazyon ve bir hastada (%4.3, 1/23) tubal ektopik gebelik gözlendi. Gebelikler arasında canlı doğum oranı %52.1 (12/23) idi. Sonuç: Sezaryen skar gebeliklerinin yönetiminde üreme sonuçları açısından birincil tedavi yöntemi konusunda fikir birliği yoktur. Aspirasyon küretaj uygun hastalarda başarılı, güvenilir, ucuz ve kolay uygulanabilir bir tedavi yöntemidir. Ayrıca doğurganlık üzerine minimum olumsuz etkiye sahip olması nedeniyle, gelecekte çocuk sahibi olmak isteyen hastalarda birinci basamak tedavi seçeneği olarak düşünülebilir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1.Graesslin O, Dedecker F, Quereux C, et al.Conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy in acesarean scar Obstetrics & Gynecology 2005; 105:869-71.
  • 2.Wang S, Li Y, Ma X. Lower uterine segmentthickness in assessing whether cesarean scarpregnancy patients could be treated with suctioncurettage. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018.https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2018.1531118.
  • 3.Jurkovic D, Hillaby K, Woelfer B, et al. First‐trimester diagnosis and management of pregnanciesimplanted into the lower uterine segment cesareansection scar Ultrasound in Obstetrics andGynecology 2003; 21: 220-7.
  • 4.Maymon R, Halperin R, Mendlovic S. Ectopicpregnancies in a Caesarean scar: a review of themedical approach to an iatrogenic complication.Human Reproduction Update 2004; 10: 515-23.
  • 5.Li N, Zhu F, Fu S, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound-guided embryo aspiration plus local administrationof low-dose methotrexate for caesarean scarpregnancy Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2012;38: 209-13.
  • 6.Polat I, Ekiz A, Acar DK, et al. Suction curettage asfirst-line treatment in cases with cesarean scarpregnancy: feasibility and effectiveness in early pregnancy The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2016; 29: 1066-71.
  • 7.Sevket O, Keskin S, Ates S, et al. Is methotrexateadministration needed for the treatment ofcaesarean section scar pregnancy in addition tosuction curettage? The European Journal ofContraception & Reproductive Health Care 2014;19: 128-33.
  • 8.Vial Y, Petignat P, Hohlfeld P. Pregnancy in acesarean scar Ultrasound in Obstetrics andGynecology 2000; 16(6): 592-3.
  • 9.Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M. Cesarean scarectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, andmanagement Obstetrics & Gynecology 2006; 107:1373-81.
  • 10.Mehmet SE, Sezin V, Mehmet O, Talip K, MehmetZT Cesarean scar pregnancy: A case report DicleMedical Journal 2011; 38: 492-4 .
  • 11.Ash A, Smith A, Maxwell D. Caesarean scarpregnancy. BJOG. 2007; 114: 253–63.
  • 12.Wang Q, Peng HL, He L, et al. Reproductiveoutcomes after previous cesarean scar pregnancy:follow up of 189 women Taiwanese Journal ofObstetrics and Gynecology 2015; 54: 551-3.
  • 13.Gao L, Huang Z, Zhang X, et al. Reproductiveoutcomes following cesarean scar pregnancy–a caseseries and review of the literature. European Journalof Obstetrics & Gynecology and ReproductiveBiology 2016; 200: 102-7.
  • 14.Sel G, Sucu S, Harma M, Harma MI. Successfulmanagement of cesarean scar pregnancy withvacuum extraction under ultrasound guidance.Acute Med Surg. 2018;5: 358–61.
  • 15.Petersen KB, Hoffmann E, Larsen CR, et al.Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review oftreatment studies Fertility and Sterility 2016; 105:958-67.
  • 16. Ou J. Peng P. Li C. Teng L. Liu X. Assessment of thenecessity of uterine artery embolization duringsuction and curettage for caesarean scar pregnancy:a prospective cohort study. BMC PregnancyChildbirth. 2020; 20: 378.
  • 17.Fylstra DL. Hysteroscopy and suction evacuationof cesarean scar pregnancies: a case report andreview. J. Obstet. Gynae- col. Res. 2014; 40: 853–7.
  • 18.Ben Nagi J, Helmy S, Ofili Yebovi D, et al.Reproductive outcomes of women with a previoushistory of Caesarean scar ectopic pregnancies HumReprod 2007; 22: 2012-5.
  • 19.Shih JC, et al. l Cesarean scar pregnancy:diagnosis with three‐dimensional (3D) ultrasoundand 3D power Doppler Ultrasound in Obstetrics andGynecology 2004; 23: 306-7.
  • 20.Tan G, Chong YS, Biswas A. Caesarean scarpregnancy: a diagnosis to consider carefully inpatients with risk factors Ann Acad Med Singapore2005; 34: 216-9.
  • 21.Wood SL, Brain PH. et al. l Medical managementof missed abortion: a randomized clinical trial.Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 99: 563-6.
  • 22.Seow KM, Hwang JL, Tsai YL, et al. Subsequentpregnancy outcome after conservative treatment ofa previous cesarean scar pregnancy Acta Obstetriciaet Gynecologica Scandinavica, 2004; 83: 1167-72.
  • 23.Timor Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G, et al.Cesarean scar pregnancy and early placenta accretashare common histology Ultrasound in Obstetrics &Gynecology 2014; 43: 383-95.
  • 24.Buca D, Liberati M, Calì G, et al. Influence ofprenatal diagnosis of abnormally invasive placentaon maternal outcome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 52: 304–9.
  • 25.Morlando M, Buca D, Timor-Tritsch I, et al.Reproductive outcome after cesarean scarpregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2020 (May),doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13918.
  • 26.Timor Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G, et al.Cesarean scar pregnancy is a precursor of morbidlyadherent placenta. Ultrasound in Obstetrics &Gynecology 2014; 44: 346-53.
  • 27.Dior UP, Palma-Dias R, Reidy KL, Cheng C, HealeyM.Cesarean scar pregnancies: incidence and factorsassociated with conversion to surgery from medicalmanagement. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018; 19:31219–6.
  • 28.Tinelli A, Tinelli R, Malvasi A. Laparoscopicmanagement of cervical–isthmic pregnancy: aproposal method Fertility and Sterility 2009; 92:829.
  • 29.Wang YL, Su TH, Chen HS. Operative laparoscopyfor unruptured ectopic pregnancy in a caesareanscar. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics &Gynaecology 2006; 113: 1035-8.
  • 30.Tekin YB, Ural UM, Balık G, et al. Management ofcesarean scar pregnancy with suction curettage: areport of four cases and review of the literatureArchives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2014; 289:1171-5.
  • 31.Liu S, Sun J, Cai B, et al. Management of cesareanscar pregnancy using ultrasound-guided dilationand curettage. Journal of Minimally InvasiveGynecology 2016; 23: 707-11.
  • 32.Özcan HC, Ugur MG, Balat Ö, et al. Is ultrasound-guided suction curettage a reliable option fortreatment of cesarean scar pregnancy? A cross-sectional retrospective study. The Journal ofMaternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2018; 31:2953–8.
  • 33.Ozdamar O, Doğer E, Arlıer S, et al. Exogenouscesarean scar pregnancies managed by suctioncurettage alone or in combination with othertherapeutic procedures: A series of 33 cases andanalysis of complication profile. J Obstet GynaecolResearch 2016; 42: 927-35.
  • 34.Timor-Tritsch IE, Cali G, Monteagudo A et al.Foley balloon catheter to prevent or managebleeding during treatment for cervical and Cesareanscar pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015;46: 118–23.
APA Sucu S, Demiroğlu Ç, Komurcu Karuserci O, bademkıran m, Sevinçler E, özcan H (2021). The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. , 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
Chicago Sucu Seyhun,Demiroğlu Çağdaş,Komurcu Karuserci Ozge,bademkıran muhammed hanifi,Sevinçler Emin,özcan Hüseyin çağlayan The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. (2021): 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
MLA Sucu Seyhun,Demiroğlu Çağdaş,Komurcu Karuserci Ozge,bademkıran muhammed hanifi,Sevinçler Emin,özcan Hüseyin çağlayan The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. , 2021, ss.244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
AMA Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. . 2021; 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
Vancouver Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. . 2021; 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
IEEE Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H "The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy." , ss.244 - 252, 2021. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
ISNAD Sucu, Seyhun vd. "The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy". (2021), 244-252. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.944332
APA Sucu S, Demiroğlu Ç, Komurcu Karuserci O, bademkıran m, Sevinçler E, özcan H (2021). The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Dicle Tıp Dergisi, 48(2), 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
Chicago Sucu Seyhun,Demiroğlu Çağdaş,Komurcu Karuserci Ozge,bademkıran muhammed hanifi,Sevinçler Emin,özcan Hüseyin çağlayan The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Dicle Tıp Dergisi 48, no.2 (2021): 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
MLA Sucu Seyhun,Demiroğlu Çağdaş,Komurcu Karuserci Ozge,bademkıran muhammed hanifi,Sevinçler Emin,özcan Hüseyin çağlayan The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Dicle Tıp Dergisi, vol.48, no.2, 2021, ss.244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
AMA Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Dicle Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 48(2): 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
Vancouver Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Dicle Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 48(2): 244 - 252. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
IEEE Sucu S,Demiroğlu Ç,Komurcu Karuserci O,bademkıran m,Sevinçler E,özcan H "The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy." Dicle Tıp Dergisi, 48, ss.244 - 252, 2021. 10.5798/dicletip.944332
ISNAD Sucu, Seyhun vd. "The effect of ultrasound-guided suction curettage on reproductive outcomes in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy". Dicle Tıp Dergisi 48/2 (2021), 244-252. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.944332