Comparison of D&C and hysteroscopy after UAE in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy A case-control study

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) stands for the severe complication secondary to cesarean section, and its incidence shows an increasing trend recently. However, no consensus has been reached about the CSP treatment. This study aims to explore the necessity of hysteroscopy (H/S) after preventive uterine artery embolization (UAE). A case-control report. The childbearing CSP patients with a cesarean section history were evaluated by ultrasonography, with a gestational age of less than 10 weeks. Thirty-four patients receiving dilation and curettage (D&C) after UAE were enrolled into the D&C group, whereas 46 undergoing H/S and curettage after UAE were enrolled into the H/S group. Differences in success rate and decrease in the beta-hCG level in serum on the second day of surgery were not significantly different between D&C and H/S groups (P > .05). Also, differences in side effect rate (except for the anesthesia-related side effects), intraoperative blood loss amount, postoperative bleeding time, and total length of hospital stay were not significant between 2 groups (P > .05). Compared with D&C group, H/S group had decreased postoperative length of hospital stay (P < .05), increased hospitalization cost (P < .05), and significantly elevated time of CSP mass disappearance (P < .05). In addition, 8 (18.19%) patients in H/S group developed anesthesia-related side effects. This study reveals no obvious difference between UAE + D&C and UAE + H/S in terms of the clinical efficacy and safety, except for the time of CSP mass disappearance and anesthesia-related side effects. The hospitalization cost is more expensive for UAE + H/S, but the postoperative length of stay is shorter for UAE + H/S. UAE + H/S is associated with the risk of anesthesia-associated side effects.