Cited by 158Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and ManagementReproductive Health and ContraceptionEndometriosis Research and Treatment

Surgical treatment of Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: efficacy and safety of ultrasound‐guided suction curettage

Open access
Jurkovic, D., Knez, J., Appiah, A., Farahani, L., Mavrelos, D., Ross, J. A.·2016·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of ultrasound‐guided suction curettage for management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment Cesarean section scar. Methods: This was a retrospective study including women diagnosed with Cesarean section scar pregnancy at two large tertiary referral early pregnancy units between 1997 and 2014. Surgical evacuation was offered to selected women presenting in the first trimester ≤ 14 weeks' gestation. All procedures were performed transcervically under ultrasound guidance using suction curettage. A modified Shirodkar cervical suture was used in women who required additional measures to secure hemostasis. Results: A total of 232 women with Cesarean section scar pregnancy were seen at the referral units; 191/232 (82.3%) women were treated surgically. The median intraoperative blood loss was 100 mL (range, 10–3000 mL ); 9/191 (4.7% (95% CI , 1.7–7.7%)) women required blood transfusion and, in one (0.5% (95% CI , 0–1.5%)), life‐saving hysterectomy had to be performed because of uncontrollable intraoperative bleeding. Of the women who attended for follow‐up, 7/116 (6.0% (95% CI , 1.7–10.3%)) required a repeat surgical procedure because of retained products of conception. Multivariable analysis showed that the gestational sac diameter (odds ratio ( OR ), 1.10 (95% CI , 1.03–1.17)) and pregnancy vascularity on Doppler examination ( OR , 3.41 (95% CI , 1.39–8.33)) were significant predictors of heavy intraoperative blood loss (> 1000 mL ). Conclusions: Ultrasound‐guided suction curettage is an effective method for the treatment of pregnancies implanted into a lower uterine segment Cesarean section scar and is associated with a low risk of blood transfusion and hysterectomy. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/uog.15857

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A caesarean scar pregnancy can be diagnosed using TVS from the second month of pregnancy using specific ultrasound criteria.

    “A caesarean scar pregnancy can be diagnosed using TVS from the second month of pregnancy using specific ultrasound criteria.129,130”
  • There has been an increase in reports describing implantation into deficient caesarean section scars and mounting evidence that a caesarean scar pregnancy diagnosed in early pregnancy can evolve into an abnormally adherent or invasive placenta in the second half of pregnancy.

    “More recently, there has been an increase in reports describing implantation into deficient caesarean section scars and mounting evidence that a caesarean scar pregnancy diagnosed in early pregnancy can evolve into an abnormally adherent or invasive placenta in the second half of pregnancy.126-130”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 158

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [5]5. Zosmer N, Fuller J, Shaikh H, Johns J, Ross JA. Natural history of early first-trimester pregnancies implanted in Cesarean scars. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46: 367-375.
  2. [35]35. Wang G, Liu X, Yin L, Sa R, Wang D, Yang Q. Evaluation of the efficacy of laparoscopic resection for the management of exogenous cesarean scar pregnancy. Fertil Steril 2014; 101: 1501-1507.

Authors
Jurkovic, D., Knez, J., Appiah, A., Farahani, L., Mavrelos, D., & Ross, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University College Hospital (GB)
  • King's College Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Jurkovic, D.
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-04
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
511-517
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
OpenAlex
W2233901648
Cited by
158
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 1
FWCI
15.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (CL-2012-18-004)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
Keywords
cesarean scar pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, retained products of conception, gestational sac diameter
MeSH terms
Adult, Cesarean Section, Cicatrix, Female, Gestational Age, Humans, Postoperative Complications, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Pregnancy, Ectopic, Retrospective Studies, Vacuum Curettage, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Ultrasonography, Interventional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review