AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (537.9 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Clinical Medicine | Publishing Language: Chinese | Open Access

Clinical efficacy of curettage in treating cesarean scar pregnancy:a randomized controlled trial

Ying YANGLu ZHOULi LUOXi XIONGZhengqiong CHEN( )
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

To compare the safety and efficacy of curettage and their combination with uterine artery embolization (UAE) in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) patients with a low score (≤4) in the ultrasound quantification scoring system.

Methods

Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria of this randomized controlled study, the women with CSP who had an ultrasonic quantitative score ≤4 and were treated in our department from May 2020 to August 2023 were enrolled, and then randomly divided into a curettage group (n=48) and a UAE combination group (n=47) in a ratio of 1∶1. General information, intraoperative conditions, and use of rescue measures within 3 months after operation were collected in the 2 groups of patients. All the patients were followed up until October 2024 to observe the pregnancy outcomes and determine the impact on the menstrual volume after the resumption of normal menstruation.

Results

The patients from the both groups completed the follow-up. Except for the maximum gestational sac diameter, there were no significant differences in other baseline data between the 2 groups, and the curettage group had notably more patients having a gestational sac diameter ≤25 mm than the combination group [37 (77.1%) vs 27 (57.4%), P<0.05]. No statistical differences were observed between the 2 groups in the intraoperative bleeding volume and use of rescue measures within 3 months after surgery. The combination group had obviously more patients with reduced menstrual volume after the resumption of normal menstruation than the dilation and curettage group [30 (63.8%) vs 13 (27.1%), P<0.001]. There were no statistically differences in pregnancy outcomes and the number of days to resume menstruation between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

For CSP patients with a score of ≤4 in the ultrasound quantification scoring system, curettage show no significant difference in therapeutic effectiveness, and even have better efficacy and safety when compared with curettage combined with UAE.

CLC number: R619.6; R713.41; R714.22 Document code: A

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Army Medical University
Pages 989-994

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
YANG Y, ZHOU L, LUO L, et al. Clinical efficacy of curettage in treating cesarean scar pregnancy:a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Army Medical University, 2025, 47(9): 989-994. https://doi.org/10.16016/j.2097-0927.202412141

3

Views

0

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 29 December 2024
Revised: 26 March 2025
Published: 15 May 2025
© 2025 Journal of Army Medical University

This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).