剖宫产瘢痕妊娠分型不同治疗方式的疗效比较。

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Haiying Sun, Juan Wang, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu
{"title":"剖宫产瘢痕妊娠分型不同治疗方式的疗效比较。","authors":"Haiying Sun, Juan Wang, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study seeks to investigate tailored treatment approaches and conduct a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of various treatment strategies for different subtypes of CSP. The primary objective is to compare the clinical outcomes associated with each subtype across the 2 existing classification methods and the novel classification method we propose, thereby identifying the most appropriate CSP classification method for developing personalized treatment strategies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A tertiary medical center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A cohort of 1248 patients diagnosed with CSP.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype were examined using different classification methods.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>The study examined the treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype using 3 classification methods and analyzed the rationale for employing multiple treatment options. Additionally, a comparative analysis of 3 vascular pretreatment methods was conducted to assess their necessity. The results revealed a success rate of 95.5% across different treatment protocols. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in the management of different CSP subtypes according to their classification system (p <.001). Compared to the other 2 CSP classifications, the Liu classification enables doctors to adopt more appropriate treatment strategies based on the specific subtypes. Furthermore, there were notable variations in the vascular pretreatment methods employed across the 5 patient subgroups (p <.001). UAE was predominantly utilized for patients undergoing suction curettage (SC) and hysteroscopy, whereas permanent vascular ligation or temporary vascular occlusion were the primary methods for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In comparison to the 2 existing CSP classification methods, the treatment strategies derived from our newly proposed CSP classification demonstrate greater appropriateness. For type ⅠCSP, ultrasound-guided SC is the standard surgical intervention. Type Ⅱa CSP is frequently addressed through hysteroscopic procedures, whereas type Ⅱb and Ⅲ CSP often necessitates laparoscopic intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":16397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Different Therapeutic Modalities in the Management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Based on Classification.\",\"authors\":\"Haiying Sun, Juan Wang, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study seeks to investigate tailored treatment approaches and conduct a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of various treatment strategies for different subtypes of CSP. The primary objective is to compare the clinical outcomes associated with each subtype across the 2 existing classification methods and the novel classification method we propose, thereby identifying the most appropriate CSP classification method for developing personalized treatment strategies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A tertiary medical center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A cohort of 1248 patients diagnosed with CSP.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype were examined using different classification methods.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>The study examined the treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype using 3 classification methods and analyzed the rationale for employing multiple treatment options. Additionally, a comparative analysis of 3 vascular pretreatment methods was conducted to assess their necessity. The results revealed a success rate of 95.5% across different treatment protocols. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in the management of different CSP subtypes according to their classification system (p <.001). Compared to the other 2 CSP classifications, the Liu classification enables doctors to adopt more appropriate treatment strategies based on the specific subtypes. Furthermore, there were notable variations in the vascular pretreatment methods employed across the 5 patient subgroups (p <.001). UAE was predominantly utilized for patients undergoing suction curettage (SC) and hysteroscopy, whereas permanent vascular ligation or temporary vascular occlusion were the primary methods for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In comparison to the 2 existing CSP classification methods, the treatment strategies derived from our newly proposed CSP classification demonstrate greater appropriateness. For type ⅠCSP, ultrasound-guided SC is the standard surgical intervention. Type Ⅱa CSP is frequently addressed through hysteroscopic procedures, whereas type Ⅱb and Ⅲ CSP often necessitates laparoscopic intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.012\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.012","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在探讨针对性的治疗方法,并对不同亚型CSP的各种治疗策略的有效性进行综合分析。主要目的是比较两种现有分类方法和我们提出的新分类方法与每个亚型相关的临床结果,从而确定最合适的CSP分类方法,以制定个性化的治疗策略。设计:回顾性研究。环境:三级医疗中心。参与者:1248例诊断为CSP的患者。干预措施:采用不同的分类方法对各亚型的治疗方法和临床结果进行分析。测量方法和主要结果:本研究采用三种分类方法检查了每个亚型的治疗方法和临床结果,并分析了采用多种治疗方案的理由。此外,对三种血管预处理方法进行了比较分析,以评估其必要性。结果显示,不同治疗方案的成功率为95.5%。统计分析显示,不同CSP亚型根据其分类系统的管理有显著差异(p < 0.001)。与其他两种CSP分类相比,Liu分类使医生能够根据具体亚型采取更合适的治疗策略。此外,在五个患者亚组中使用的血管预处理方法存在显著差异(p < 0.001)。UAE主要用于进行抽吸刮除(SC)和宫腔镜检查的患者,而永久性血管结扎或暂时血管闭塞是腹腔镜手术患者的主要方法。结论:与现有的两种CSP分类方法相比,我们新提出的CSP分类得出的治疗策略更合适。对于Ⅰ型CSP,超声引导SC是标准的手术干预。Ⅱa型CSP通常通过宫腔镜手术解决,而Ⅱb型和Ⅲ型CSP通常需要腹腔镜干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Efficacy of Different Therapeutic Modalities in the Management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Based on Classification.

Objective: This study seeks to investigate tailored treatment approaches and conduct a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of various treatment strategies for different subtypes of CSP. The primary objective is to compare the clinical outcomes associated with each subtype across the 2 existing classification methods and the novel classification method we propose, thereby identifying the most appropriate CSP classification method for developing personalized treatment strategies.

Design: A retrospective study.

Setting: A tertiary medical center.

Participants: A cohort of 1248 patients diagnosed with CSP.

Interventions: The treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype were examined using different classification methods.

Measurements and main results: The study examined the treatment approaches and clinical outcomes of each subtype using 3 classification methods and analyzed the rationale for employing multiple treatment options. Additionally, a comparative analysis of 3 vascular pretreatment methods was conducted to assess their necessity. The results revealed a success rate of 95.5% across different treatment protocols. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in the management of different CSP subtypes according to their classification system (p <.001). Compared to the other 2 CSP classifications, the Liu classification enables doctors to adopt more appropriate treatment strategies based on the specific subtypes. Furthermore, there were notable variations in the vascular pretreatment methods employed across the 5 patient subgroups (p <.001). UAE was predominantly utilized for patients undergoing suction curettage (SC) and hysteroscopy, whereas permanent vascular ligation or temporary vascular occlusion were the primary methods for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Conclusions: In comparison to the 2 existing CSP classification methods, the treatment strategies derived from our newly proposed CSP classification demonstrate greater appropriateness. For type ⅠCSP, ultrasound-guided SC is the standard surgical intervention. Type Ⅱa CSP is frequently addressed through hysteroscopic procedures, whereas type Ⅱb and Ⅲ CSP often necessitates laparoscopic intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, formerly titled The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, is an international clinical forum for the exchange and dissemination of ideas, findings and techniques relevant to gynecologic endoscopy and other minimally invasive procedures. The Journal, which presents research, clinical opinions and case reports from the brightest minds in gynecologic surgery, is an authoritative source informing practicing physicians of the latest, cutting-edge developments occurring in this emerging field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信