Abstract
Purpose
To summarize and present a single tertiary center’s 25 years of experience managing patients with caesarean scar pregnancies and their long-term reproductive and obstetric outcomes.
Methods
A 25-year retrospective study included women diagnosed with CSP from 1996 to 2020 in one tertiary center. Data were retrieved from the medical records and through a telephone interview. Diagnosis was made by sonography and color Doppler. Treatments included methotrexate, suction curettage, hysteroscopy, embolization and wedge resection by laparoscopy or laparotomy as a function of the clinical manifestations, the physicians’ decisions, patient counseling, and parental requests.
Results
Analysis of the records recovered 60 cases of CSP (two of whom were recurrent). All patients had complete resolution with no indication for hysterectomy. Thirty-five patients had a long-term follow-up, of whom 24 (68.6%) attempted to conceive again and 22 (91.6%) succeeded. There were 17/22 (77.3%) patients with at least one live birth, 3/22 (13.6%) spontaneous miscarriages and 2/22 (9%) recurrent CSP. The obstetric complications included abnormal placentation 5/19 (26.3%), premature rupture of membranes 2/19 (10.5%), preterm delivery 4/19 (21%) and abnormality of the uterine scar 2/19 (10.5%). There was one case of neonatal death due to complications of prematurity 1/19 (5.2%).
Conclusion
CSP treatment focusing on reducing morbidity and preserving fertility has encouraging long-term reproductive and obstetric outcomes. In subsequent pregnancies, we recommend performing an early first trimester vaginal scan to map the location of the new pregnancy, followed by close monitoring given the obstetric complications mentioned above.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article. Additional data are available by the corresponding author upon a reasonable request and subjected to the ethical standards and patients confidentiality.
References
Maymon R, Halperin R, Mendelovic S, Schnider D, Herman A (2004) Ectopic pregnancies in a caesarean scar: review of the medical approach to an iatrogenic complication. Hum Reprod Update 10:515–523
Maymon R, Svirsky R, Smorgick N et al (2011) Fertility performance and obstetric outcomes among women with previous caesarean section. J Ultrasound Med 30:1179–1184
Jurkovic D, Hillaby K, Woelfer B, Lawrence A, Salim R, Elson CJ (2003) First trimester diagnosis and management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment cesarean section scar. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 21:220–227
Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M (2006) Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis and management. Obstet Gynecol 107:1373–1381
Seow KM, Huang KW, Lin YH, Lin MY, Tsai YL, Hwang JL (2004) Cesarean scar pregnancy: issues in management. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 23:247–253
Harb HM, Knight M, Bottomley C et al (2018) Caesarean scar pregnancy in the UK: a national cohort study. BJOG 125:1663–1670
Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A (2012) Unforeseen consequence of the increasing rate of cesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 207:14–29
Timor-Tritsch IE, Khatib N, Monteagudo A, Ramos J, Berg R, Kovacs S (2015) Cesarean scar pregnancies. J Ultrasound Med 34:601–610
Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G et al (2014) Cesarean scar pregnancy and early placenta accreta share common histology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 43:383–395
Herman A, Weinraub Z, Avrech O, Maymon R, Ron-El R, Bukovsky Y (1995) Follow-up and outcome isthmic pregnancy located in previous caesarean section scar. Br J Obstet Gynecol 102:839–841
Timor-Tritsch IE (2021) Cesarean scar pregnancy: a therapeutic dilemma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 57:32–33
Petersen KB, Hoffman E, Larsen CR, Nielsen HS (2016) Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies. Fertil Steril 105:958–967
Glenn TL, Bembry J, Findley AD et al (2018) Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: current management strategies. Obstet Gynecol Surv 73:293–302
Lin M, Huifang W, Xiaoyun W (2022) Evaluation of the treatment of high intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage for exogenous cesarean scar pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 306:769–777
Xiaofeng X, Dongdong L, Lan Y, Xiujuan J, Xiangyi K, Dezhu C, Tong R, Huaijun Z (2021) Surgical outcomes of cesarean scar pregnancy: an 8-year experience at a single institution. Arch Gynecol Obstet 303:1223–1233
Cali G, Timor-Tritsch IE, Palacios-Jaraquemada JM et al (2018) Outcome of cesarean scar pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 51:169–175
Sadeghi H, Rutherford T, Rackow BW et al (2010) cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: case series and review of the literature. AM J Perinatol 27:111–120
Maheux-Lacroix S, Li F, Bujold E, Nesbitt-Hawes E, Deans R, Abbott J (2017) Cesarean scar pregnancies: a systematic review of treatment options. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 24:915–925
Gao L, Huang Z, Zhang X, Zhou N, Huang X, Wang X (2016) Reproductive outcomes following cesarean scar pregnancy—a case series and review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 200:102–107
Nagi BJ, Helmy S, Ofili-Yebovi D, Yazbek J, Sawyer E, Jurkovic D (2007) Reproductive outcomes of women with a previous history of caesarean scar ectopic pregnancies. Hum Reprod 22:2012–2015
Yang L, Lingjia L, Wenxian W, Jin S, Xinmei Z, Xiufeng H (2018) Reproductive study of patients with cesarean scar pregnancies treated by uterine artery chemoembolization and curettage. Int J Gynecol Obstet 143:172–177
Morlando M, Buca D, Timor-Tritsch I, Cali G, Palacios-Jaraquemada J, Monteagudo A, Khalil A, Cennamo C, La Manna V, Liberati M, D’Amico A, Nappi L, Colacurci N, D’Antonio F (2020) Reproductive outcome after cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 99(10):1278–1289
Wu J, Ye J, OuYang Z, Wan Z, Zhang Q, Zhong B, Wei S (2021) Outcomes of reproduction following cesarean scar pregnancy treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 262:80–92
Chen L, Xiao S, Zhu X, He S, Xue M (2018) 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 Minim Invasive Gynecol 26(5):883–890
Maymon R, Halperin R, Mendlovic S et al (2004) Ectopic pregnancies in cesarean section scars: the 8 year experience of one medical center. Hum Reprod 19:278–282
Fylstra DL, Pound-Chang T, Miller MG, Cooper A, Miller KM (2002) Ectopic pregnancy within a cesarean delivery scar: a case report. AM J Obstet Gynecol 187:302–304
Godin PA, Bassil S, Donnez J (1997) An ectopic pregnancy developing in a previous caesarean section scar. Fertil Steril 67:398–400
Seow KM, Huang LW, Lin YH, Lin MY, Tsai L, Hawang JL (2004) A cesarean scar pregnancy: issues in management. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 23:247–253
Vial Y, Petignat P, Hohlfield P (2000) Pregnancy in a cesarean scar. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16:592–593
Wang Q, Ma H, He L, Bian C, Zhao X (2015) Risk factors for intra-operative hemorrhage and bleeding risk scoring system for caesarean scar pregnancy: a case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 195:141–145
Funding
The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
YS: manuscript writing; RM: manuscript editing; MG–K: data collection; NK: data collection; MP-Z: data collection; NS: manuscript editing; ZV: manuscript editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (0281-16-ASF).
Informed consent
Since this is a retrospective study, no informed consent was needed. Patients who were interviewed by the phone gave their informed consent verbally at the beginning of the survey.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Shiber, Y., Maymon, R., Gal-Kochav, M. et al. Caesarean scar pregnancy: is there a light in the end of the tunnel?. Arch Gynecol Obstet 307, 1057–1064 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06888-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06888-4