Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2017 Jul-Sep;6(3):132-134.
doi: 10.1016/j.gmit.2017.02.003. Epub 2017 Mar 15.

A three-step evaluation for safer curettage treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy

Affiliations
Case Reports

A three-step evaluation for safer curettage treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy

Tomomi Matsushita et al. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2017 Jul-Sep.

Abstract

Dilation and curettage is one of the treatment options for cesarean scar pregnancy, however, it sometimes requires a salvage therapy. Few reports discuss the methods of evaluating cesarean scar pregnancy before therapeutic procedures. We aimed to present a case study in which a three-step approach using a combination of preoperational sonohysterography, hysteroscopy, and laparoscopy was performed to evaluate cesarean scar pregnancy. A 33-year-old, G2P2, Japanese female with a history of two elective cesarean sections was diagnosed with viable cesarean scar pregnancy. We used the three-step approach right after undergoing bilateral uterine artery embolization and confirmed that there was a low possibility of fatal complications and we performed dilation and curettage. These steps could be done safely even if the cesarean scar pregnancy was viable. To perform safer curettage on cesarean scar pregnancy patients, these three steps seem to be useful.

Keywords: cesarean scar pregnancy; cesarean section; endoscopy; pregnancy loss.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) Transvaginal ultrasonography on admission showing the thin anterior uterine myometrium (2.5 mm) and the gestational sac attached to the cesarean scar. (B) Sonohysterography showing the gestational sac floating in the water.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A) Hysteroscopy showing a gap between the wall and the attached part of the gestational sac. (B) Laparoscopy with a light. No bulging was seen on the vesicouterine pouch. (C) Intra-abdominal space the light turned off. The light from the hysteroscope was not observed.

Similar articles

References

    1. Arslan M, Pata O, Dilek TU, Aktas A, Aban M, Dilek S. Treatment of viable cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy with suction curettage. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005;89(2):163–166. - PubMed
    1. Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1373–1381. - PubMed
    1. Sugawara J, Senoo M, Chisaka H, Yaegashi N, Okamura K. Successful conservative treatment of a cesarean scar pregnancy with uterine artery embolization. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2005;206(3):261–265. - PubMed
    1. Vial Y, Petignat P, Hohlfeld P. Pregnancy in a cesarean scar. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(6):592–593. - PubMed
    1. Fylstra DL. Hysteroscopy and suction evacuation of cesarean scar pregnancies: a case report and review. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(3):853–857. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources