Evolution of treatment approaches for cesarean scar pregnancy

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cesarean scar pregnancy is a relevant problem in modern obstetrics and gynecology. This condition may lead to life-threatening complications requiring urgent medical intervention. Hysteroscopic resection using the cold loop technique in combination with vacuum aspiration of the gestational sac is an effective and safe surgical method for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate treatment approaches for cesarean scar pregnancy and to determine optimal surgical strategies, as well as to analyze morphological findings in surgical specimens obtained from patients with cesarean scar pregnancy.

METHODS: The study was conducted at the Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology named after Academician V.I. Krasnopolsky. Between 2016 and 2025, surgical treatment was performed in 41 patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Management strategies used in 2016–2019 were compared with those applied over the subsequent 5 years. Clinical characteristics, preoperative ultrasound findings, and surgical treatment methods were analyzed (including laparotomic metroplasty, vacuum aspiration of the gestational sac, hysteroscopic resection using a cold loop, and hysterectomy).

RESULTS: More than half of the examined women had a history of more than two cesarean deliveries performed with cervical dilation greater than 5 cm. Ultrasound examination demonstrated localization of the gestational sac within the scar area in all patients (COS-1 sign). Signs of chorionic invasion were identified in 22.7% of cases. Both organ-preserving and radical treatment approaches were applied. Over the past five years, a trend toward increased use of minimally invasive surgical techniques has been observed at the institute, resulting in reduced duration of hospitalization and postoperative rehabilitation. The complex of morphological features identified within scar niches containing ectopic pregnancies was characteristic of placenta accreta spectrum disorders (placenta creta); however, given the early gestational age and absence of a fully formed placenta, this condition may be referred to as chorionic invasion.

CONCLUSION: Cesarean scar pregnancy is a rare but extremely dangerous complication that may result in uterine rupture, massive hemorrhage, and maternal mortality. Minimally invasive organ-preserving techniques—vacuum aspiration and hysteroscopic resection using the cold loop technique—represent the optimal treatment strategy. In cases of pronounced destructive changes of the uterine wall, metroplasty is justified.

About the authors

Daria V. Suslikova

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Author for correspondence.
Email: fferyllydd73@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2906-7546
Russian Federation, Moscow

Roman G. Shmakov

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Email: r_shmakov@oparina4.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2206-1002
SPIN-code: 3804-3269

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor

Russian Federation, Moscow

Irina V. Barinova

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education

Email: barinova.irina.vladimirovna@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0447-1734
SPIN-code: 6145-0926

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Marina Yu. Shakhina

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Email: shahinamarina@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4599-4446
SPIN-code: 5859-5973

MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, Moscow

Tatyana A. Batenkova

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Email: t.batenkova@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-2872-8973
Russian Federation, Moscow

Anton A. Fedorov

Moscow Regional Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Moscow Regional Research Clinical Institute

Email: aa.fedorov@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2590-5087

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

References

  1. Silva B, Viana Pinto P, Costa MA. Cesarean scar pregnancy: A systematic review on expectant management. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023;288:36–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.030
  2. Calì G, Timor-Tritsch IE, Palacios-Jaraquemada J, et al. Outcome of Cesarean scar pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(2):169–175. doi: 10.1002/uog.17568
  3. Larsen JV, Solomon MH. Pregnancy in a uterine scar sacculus — an unusual cause of postabortal haemorrhage. A case report. S Afr Med J. 1978;53(4):142–143.
  4. Seow KM, Huang LW, Lin YH, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: issues in management. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23(3):247–253. doi: 10.1002/uog.974
  5. Jurkovic D, Hillaby K, Woelfer B, et al. First-trimester diagnosis and management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment Cesarean section scar. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21(3):220–227. doi: 10.1002/uog.56
  6. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM); Miller R, Gyamfi-Bannerman C. Society for maternal-fetal medicine consult series #63: cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227(3):B9–В20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.024
  7. Panaitescu AM, Ciobanu AM, Gică N, et al. Diagnosis and management of cesarean scar pregnancy and placenta accreta spectrum: case series and review of the literature. J Ultrasound Med. 2021;40(9):1975–1986. doi: 10.1002/jum.15574
  8. Maheux-Lacroix S, Li F, Bujold E, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancies: a systematic review of treatment options. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(6):915–925. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.05.019
  9. Giampaolino P, De Rosa N, Morra I, et al. Management of cesarean scar pregnancy: a single-institution retrospective review. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:6486407. doi: 10.1155/2018/6486407
  10. Kutlesic R, Kutlesic M, Vukomanovic P, et al. cesarean scar pregnancy successfully managed to term: when the patient is determined to keep the pregnancy. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020;56(10):496. sdoi: 10.3390/medicina56100496
  11. Alameddine S, Lucidi A, Jurkovic D, et al. Treatments for cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2024;37(1):2327569. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2024.2327569
  12. Hussein AM, Elbarmelgy RA, Elbarmelgy RM, et al. Prospective evaluation of impact of post-Cesarean section uterine scarring in perinatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorder. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;59(4):474–482. doi: 10.1002/uog.23732
  13. Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy is a precursor of morbidly adherent placenta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44(3):346–53. doi: 10.1002/uog.13426
  14. Godin PA, Bassil S, Donnez J. An ectopic pregnancy developing in a previous caesarian section scar. Fertil Steril. 1997;67(2):398–400. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(97)81930-9
  15. Maymon R, Halperin R, Mendlovic S, et al. Ectopic pregnancies in a caesarean scar: review of the medical approach to an iatrogenic complication. Hum Reprod Update. 2004;10(6):515–523. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmh042
  16. Ash A, Smith A, Maxwell D. Caesarean scar pregnancy. BJOG. 2007;114(3):253–263. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01237.x
  17. Tantbirojn P, Crum CP, Parast MM. Pathophysiology of placenta creta: the role of decidua and extravillous trophoblast. Placenta. 2008;29(7): 639-645. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2008.04.008
  18. Jauniaux E, Mavrelos D, De Braud LV, et al. Impact of location on placentation in live tubal and cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies. Placenta. 2021;108:109–113. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2021.03.019
  19. Fu L, Luo Y, Huang J. Cesarean scar pregnancy with expectant management. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2022;48(7):1683–1690. doi: 10.1111/jog.15258
  20. ESHRE working group on Ectopic Pregnancy; Kirk E, Ankum P, Jakab A, et al. Terminology for describing normally sited and ectopic pregnancies on ultrasound: ESHRE recommendations for good practice. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020(4):hoaa055. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa055
  21. Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1373–1381. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000218690.24494.ce
  22. Gonzalez N, Tulandi T. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(5):731–738. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.02.020
  23. Gus AI, Yarygina TA, Mikheeva AA, et al. Standardized examination of postoperative uterine scar. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2022;(1):42–47. doi: 10.18565/aig.2022.1.42-47 EDN: YWXUZT
  24. Cali G, Forlani F, Timor-Tritsch IE, et al. Natural history of cesarean scar pregnancy on prenatal ultrasound: the crossover sign. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(1):100–104. doi: 10.1002/uog.16216
  25. D’Antonio F, Palacios-Jaraquemada J, Lim PS, et al. Counseling in fetal medicine: evidence-based answers to clinical questions on morbidly adherent placenta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):290–301. doi: 10.1002/uog.14950
  26. Palacios-Jaraquemada JM, D’Antonio F, Buca D, et al. Systematic review on near miss cases of placenta accreta spectrum disorders: correlation with invasion topography, prenatal imaging, and surgical outcome. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;33(19):3377–3384. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1570494
  27. Clinical recommendations: Ectopic pregnancy. 2021–2022–2023 (01.07.2021). Approved by the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 36 р.
  28. Diagnosis and Management of Ectopic Pregnancy (Green-top Guideline No. 21). RCOG/AEPU Joint Guideline. November 2016: 41.
  29. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Medical treatment of ectopic pregnancy: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):638–644. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.013
  30. Muraji M, Mabuchi S, Hisamoto K, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancies successfully treated with methotrexate. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(6):720–723. doi: 10.1080/00016340902883141
  31. Fadhlaoui A, Khrouf M, Khémiri K, et al. Successful conservative treatment of a cesarean scar pregnancy with systemically administered methotrexate and subsequent dilatation and curettage: a case report. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2012;2012:248564. doi: 10.1155/2012/248564
  32. Buyanova SN, Shchukina NA, Chechneva MA, et al. Pregnancy in a cesarean section scar: possibilities of surgical correction. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2020;20(6):65–70. doi: 10.17116/rosakush20202006165 EDN: ZCHGUF

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2025 Eco-Vector

License URL: https://eco-vector.com/for_authors.php#07

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).