Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2017, Vol. 44 Issue (6): 856-861    DOI: 10.12891/ceog3698.2017
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Hysteroscopic removal of cesarean scar pregnancy after primary therapy with methotrexate: a case series
G. Garuti1, *(), S. Calabrese1, G. Baudino2, C. Reato2, L. Quirino1, M. Di Mario1
1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Public Hospital of Lodi, Lodi, Italy
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Public Hospital of Crema (CR), Crema, Italy
Download:  PDF
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Purpose of Investigation: To present the clinical outcome of cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) managed by methotrexate (MTX) administration followed by hysteroscopy removal. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was undertaken in eight consecutive patients admitted to the present Hospital with a diagnosis of CSP, based on ultrasound assessment. The patients underwent systemic (five patients) or local (three patients) MTX administration for pregnancy termination, followed by hysteroscopy removal. A 27Fr resectoscope was used for hysteroscopy surgery. Results: Mean gestational age was of 7.8 weeks and five patients showed a viable embryo. All pregnancies were terminated after MTX; since drug administration, hysteroscopy removal was carried-out after a mean time of 36.1 days. Hysteroscopy view found type 1 and type 2 CSP in one and six patients, respectively. In one patient hysteroscopy assessment demonstrated a cervical pregnancy instead of a type 1 CSP suspected by ultrasound. Mean operating time was of 20.8 minutes, no further intervention was needed, and neither complications were reported. The mean time of menses resumption was of 35.5 days. After the first menstrual period all patients showed β-hCG level in the non-pregnant range and empty uterine cavities. Conclusions: Termination of CSP by MTX, combined with its hysteroscopic removal, resulted to be safe and effective.
Key words:  Cesarean scar pregnancy      Cervical pregnancy      Ectopic pregnancy      Hysteroscopy      Methotrexate     
Published:  10 December 2017     
*Corresponding Author(s):  G. GARUTI     E-mail:  giancarlo.garuti@tiscali.it

Cite this article: 

G. Garuti, S. Calabrese, G. Baudino, C. Reato, L. Quirino, M. Di Mario. Hysteroscopic removal of cesarean scar pregnancy after primary therapy with methotrexate: a case series. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(6): 856-861.

URL: 

https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/10.12891/ceog3698.2017     OR     https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/Y2017/V44/I6/856

[1] Alessandra Gallo, Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo, Antonietta Legnante, Romolo Di Iorio, Carlo De Angelis. Hysteroscopy in COVID-19 times[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1017-1021.
[2] Xin Du, Qian Zou, Yu-Lan Liu. Transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy by uterine artery pre-ligation: a report of 4 cases[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1044-1047.
[3] Maurizio Nicola D'Alterio, Francesco Scicchitano, Daniela Fanni, Gavino Faa, Antonio Simone Laganà, Marco Noventa, Felice Sorrentino, Luigi Nappi, Stefano Angioni. Ex vivo myolysis with dual wavelengths diode laser system: macroscopicand histopathological examination[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 875-882.
[4] Rocio Montejo, Jonas Hermansson, Lena Sandin Wranker, Louise Danielsson. Doula support in office hysteroscopy: results from a pilot study[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 955-961.
[5] Qian Hu, Mohammed Sharooq Paramboor, Tao Guo. Diagnosis and management of intramural ectopic pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 974-979.
[6] Lin Ling, Juanjuan Fu, Lei Zhan, Wenyan Wang, Qian Su, Jun Li, Bing Wei. Surgical management for type II cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 555-560.
[7] Li-Min Zhou, Jie Duan, Yan Yang. Endoscopic treatment with concomitant ultrasound monitoring of obstructive septum in Robert's uterus following pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 711-714.
[8] Jun Xiong, Fen Fu, Wei Zhang, Ji Luo, Yuan-Yuan Xu, Lu-Lu Le, Xiao-Ju He. Study on influencing factors and related clinical issues in cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(2): 365-371.
[9] Xiao-Hua Li, Jian-Kun Zhou, Jing-Dan Cheng. Application of ultrasound in hepatic pregnancy: a case report and literature review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(2): 434-438.
[10] J.R. Huang, X. Li, Q.Z. Peng, J.J. Zhang, X.X. Lin, L.Q. Xie, X.H. Wu, W.S. Zhang. Elective embryo or fetal reduction for caesarean scar pregnancy combined with intrauterine pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 867-874.
[11] X.R. Wang, Y.F. Wang, S.W. Kang, Y. Zhang. Treatment outcomes of uterine lesion resection versus hysterectomy for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 882-886.
[12] J.R. Huang, X. Li, C. Fu, Y.H. Deng, T. Gao, H.W. Zhang. Is preprocessing helpful for suction and curettage in treating cesarean scar pregnancy?[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 900-905.
[13] L.B. Liu, H.T. Sun, S.F. Liu, R.X. Shi. Laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 911-914.
[14] S.J. Liu, W. Lv, M. Shi, B.L. Bi, H.D. Wang. Hysteroscopic outcomes after radiofrequency ablation of myomas: Two case reports and literature review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 991-993.
[15] M. Elmahdy, I. Elfourtia, H. Maghraby. Office hysteroscopy in cases of recurrent implantation failure; Do or not to do[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(5): 723-728.
No Suggested Reading articles found!