Jie Gao , Wenjing Wang , Zhuoying Zhang, Saiming Cheng, Jiejun Cheng, Le Fu, Feng Gao
{"title":"子宫动脉栓塞联合扩张刮宫术(D&C)或单纯扩张刮宫术治疗剖宫产疤痕妊娠后生育能力的临床研究","authors":"Jie Gao , Wenjing Wang , Zhuoying Zhang, Saiming Cheng, Jiejun Cheng, Le Fu, Feng Gao","doi":"10.1016/j.eurox.2025.100379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The aim of this study was to compare the reproductive outcomes of patients with cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) following uterine artery embolization (UAE) and dilation and curettage (D&C) treatments, and to evaluate the impact of UAE on fertility.</div></div><div><h3>Materials</h3><div>and methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted. Patients diagnosed with CSP between 2019 and 2021 were included in the study. Clinical data and fertility outcomes were collected and reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups based on their treatment option: the UAE combined with D&C group and the D&C alone group.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 91 CSP patients were enrolled in the study. Of these, 49 were treated with D&C, while 42 received UAE combined with D&C. The average gestational age in the UAE group was significantly longer than that in the D&C group. The average diameter of the gestational mass was significantly larger in the UAE group than in the D&C group (42.2 ± 19.8 mm vs 23.8 ± 15.9 mm). The other clinical features were not significantly different between the two groups. The average menstrual recovery time was 1.0 ± 0.20 months (range: 1–2 months) in the D&C group, and 2.0 ± 2.85 months (range: 1–18 months) in the UAE combined with D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. The average menstrual blood volume (MBV) decreased in 79 % of patients in the UAE group, compared to 18 % in the D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pregnancy rate and birth rate (75 % vs 78 %, 63 % vs 56 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>UAE combined with D&C is an efficient and safe treatment for CSP. Our study showed that decreased MBV and longer menstrual recovery time in UAE combined with D&C group, but there are no statistical difference in fertility outcomes between the two groups, which suggests probably a reversible impact on the reproductive function.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37085,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical investigation of fertility after uterine artery embolization combined with dilation and curettage(D&C) or D&C alone for cesarean scar pregnancies\",\"authors\":\"Jie Gao , Wenjing Wang , Zhuoying Zhang, Saiming Cheng, Jiejun Cheng, Le Fu, Feng Gao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eurox.2025.100379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The aim of this study was to compare the reproductive outcomes of patients with cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) following uterine artery embolization (UAE) and dilation and curettage (D&C) treatments, and to evaluate the impact of UAE on fertility.</div></div><div><h3>Materials</h3><div>and methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted. Patients diagnosed with CSP between 2019 and 2021 were included in the study. Clinical data and fertility outcomes were collected and reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups based on their treatment option: the UAE combined with D&C group and the D&C alone group.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 91 CSP patients were enrolled in the study. Of these, 49 were treated with D&C, while 42 received UAE combined with D&C. The average gestational age in the UAE group was significantly longer than that in the D&C group. The average diameter of the gestational mass was significantly larger in the UAE group than in the D&C group (42.2 ± 19.8 mm vs 23.8 ± 15.9 mm). The other clinical features were not significantly different between the two groups. The average menstrual recovery time was 1.0 ± 0.20 months (range: 1–2 months) in the D&C group, and 2.0 ± 2.85 months (range: 1–18 months) in the UAE combined with D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. The average menstrual blood volume (MBV) decreased in 79 % of patients in the UAE group, compared to 18 % in the D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pregnancy rate and birth rate (75 % vs 78 %, 63 % vs 56 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>UAE combined with D&C is an efficient and safe treatment for CSP. Our study showed that decreased MBV and longer menstrual recovery time in UAE combined with D&C group, but there are no statistical difference in fertility outcomes between the two groups, which suggests probably a reversible impact on the reproductive function.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X\",\"volume\":\"26 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590161325000158\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590161325000158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的比较子宫动脉栓塞(UAE)和子宫扩张刮除(D&;C)治疗后剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSP)患者的生殖结局,并评价UAE对生育能力的影响。材料和方法:采用回顾性病例对照研究。2019年至2021年间诊断为CSP的患者被纳入研究。临床资料和生育结果的收集和回顾。根据患者的治疗选择将患者分为两组:UAE联合D&;C组和D&;C单独组。结果共91例CSP患者入组。其中49例采用D&;C治疗,42例采用UAE联合D&;C治疗。UAE组的平均胎龄明显长于D&;C组。UAE组妊娠团块的平均直径明显大于D&;C组(42.2 ± 19.8 mm vs 23.8 ± 15.9 mm)。其他临床特征在两组间无显著差异。D&;C组平均月经恢复时间为1.0 ± 0.20个月(范围:1-2个月),UAE联合D&;C组平均月经恢复时间为2.0 ± 2.85个月(范围:1-18个月),两组差异有统计学意义。UAE组患者的平均月经血量(MBV)下降了79. %,而D&;C组患者的平均月经血量下降了18. %,两组之间存在显著差异。两组在妊娠率和出生率方面无显著差异(75 % vs 78 %,63 % vs 56 %)。结论联合D&;C治疗CSP是一种安全有效的治疗方法。我们的研究显示,UAE联合D&;C组MBV降低,月经恢复时间延长,但两组生育结果无统计学差异,这可能对生殖功能有可逆影响。
Clinical investigation of fertility after uterine artery embolization combined with dilation and curettage(D&C) or D&C alone for cesarean scar pregnancies
Objective
The aim of this study was to compare the reproductive outcomes of patients with cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) following uterine artery embolization (UAE) and dilation and curettage (D&C) treatments, and to evaluate the impact of UAE on fertility.
Materials
and methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted. Patients diagnosed with CSP between 2019 and 2021 were included in the study. Clinical data and fertility outcomes were collected and reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups based on their treatment option: the UAE combined with D&C group and the D&C alone group.
Results
A total of 91 CSP patients were enrolled in the study. Of these, 49 were treated with D&C, while 42 received UAE combined with D&C. The average gestational age in the UAE group was significantly longer than that in the D&C group. The average diameter of the gestational mass was significantly larger in the UAE group than in the D&C group (42.2 ± 19.8 mm vs 23.8 ± 15.9 mm). The other clinical features were not significantly different between the two groups. The average menstrual recovery time was 1.0 ± 0.20 months (range: 1–2 months) in the D&C group, and 2.0 ± 2.85 months (range: 1–18 months) in the UAE combined with D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. The average menstrual blood volume (MBV) decreased in 79 % of patients in the UAE group, compared to 18 % in the D&C group, with a significant difference between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pregnancy rate and birth rate (75 % vs 78 %, 63 % vs 56 %).
Conclusion
UAE combined with D&C is an efficient and safe treatment for CSP. Our study showed that decreased MBV and longer menstrual recovery time in UAE combined with D&C group, but there are no statistical difference in fertility outcomes between the two groups, which suggests probably a reversible impact on the reproductive function.