Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE) versus Laparoscopic Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Debridement Surgery (LCSPDS) in Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy.

Abstract

BackgroundThe present study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of uterine artery embolization (UAE) vs. laparoscopic cesarean scar pregnancy debridement surgery (LCSPDS) in the treatment of patients with cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).Material/MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 87 CSP patients from March 2012 to February 2017. For the included 87 cases, 51 were treated with UAE and 36 were treated with LCSPDS. The operation success rate, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, length of hospital stay, perioperative complications, and β-HCG level were compared.ResultsFor the UAE group, 41 patients underwent successful surgeries (80.4% success rate), and 36 cases in the LCSPDS group were successfully treated, with no case of perioperative death. In the UAE group, the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 82.23±45.21 min, 112.58±68.54 mL, and 12.56±3.03 days, respectively. In the LCSPDS group, the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 85.45±30.02 min, 108.56±54.12 mL and 7.65±2.48 days, respectively. The length of hospital stay for the UAE group was significantly longer than in the LCSPDS group (P<0.05).ConclusionsUAE and LCSPDS each have their own advantages and disadvantages in treating CSP. Thus, appropriate individualized surgical programs based on specific patient circumstances are needed to avoid indiscriminately performing complete uterine cavity curettage.