Risk factors associated with retained products of conception after hysteroscopic surgery for cesarean scar pregnancy

WANG Chao, WANG Yang, YANG Shuo, MA Cai-hong, LI Rong

Chinese Journal of Practical Gynecology and Obstetrics ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (10) : 1022-1026.

PDF(901 KB)
PDF(901 KB)
Chinese Journal of Practical Gynecology and Obstetrics ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (10) : 1022-1026. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2025100113

Risk factors associated with retained products of conception after hysteroscopic surgery for cesarean scar pregnancy

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective Previous studies on the surgical treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) have primarily focused on traditional dilation and curettage. In recent years,hysteroscopic resection of the scar site pregnancy lesion has gradually become an important method for CSP treatment,but it still faces the risk of retained products of conception (RPOC). This study aims to explore the risk factors associated with RPOC after hysteroscopic surgery for CSP by integrating multi-dimensional objective indicators. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted in 1022 patients diagnosed with CSP and treated with hysteroscopic surgery at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of Peking University Third Hospital from January 2014 to October 2024. Patients with postoperative RPOC were included as the study group,and those without RPOC as the control group. Differences in medical history,clinical manifestations,laboratory and imaging examinations,and other aspects were compared between the two groups. Results The overall incidence of RPOC after hysteroscopic surgery for CSP was 4.0% (41/1022). Univariate analysis indicated that patient’s age,uterine position,gravidity and parity,number of cesarean sections,history of CSP,history of intrauterine surgery,gestational age at this CSP diagnosis,presence of fetal heart activity,and preoperative clinical symptoms (abdominal pain/ vaginal bleeding) were not directly related to postoperative RPOC(all P>0.05). After incorporating interaction analysis,multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a mean gestational sac diameter≥15 mm and a residual myometrial thickness <2.5 mm at the lower uterine segment scar site measured by magnetic resonance imaging (OR=4.262,95% CI 2.179-8.337,P<0.001) were independent risk factors for RPOC. Conclusions RPOC after hysteroscopic surgery for CSP is closely related to the diameter of the gestational sac and the residual myometrial thickness at the lower uterine segment scar site. A comprehensive assessment and strict indication control should be conducted before CSP patients undergo hysteroscopic surgery. Early detection and early intervention are important ways to reduce the incidence of RPOC.

Key words

mesenchymal tumors of the uterine corpus / intraoperative frozen section examination / permanent section examination / accuracy / clinical application value

Cite this article

Download Citations
WANG Chao , WANG Yang , YANG Shuo , et al . Risk factors associated with retained products of conception after hysteroscopic surgery for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2025, 41(10): 1022-1026 https://doi.org/10.19538/j.fk2025100113

References

[1]
Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, et al. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates:global and regional estimates[J]. BMJ Glob Health, 2021, 6(6):e005671. DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671.
[2]
Li HT, Hellerstein S, Zhou YB, et al. Trends in cesarean delivery rates in China,2008-2018[J]. JAMA, 2020, 323(1):89-91. DOI:10.1001/jama.2019.17595.
[3]
Shi H, Chen L, Wei Y, et al. Improving maternal healthcare further in China at a time of low maternal mortality[J]. BMJ, 2024, 386:e078640. DOI:10.1136/bmj-2023-078640.
[4]
Silva B, Viana Pinto P, Costa MA. Cesarean scar pregnancy:A systematic review on expectant management[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2023, 288:36-43. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.030.
[5]
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #63:Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2022, 227(3):B9-B20. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.024.
[6]
Jiang Y, Liu Y, Liu N, et al. Efficacy and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy:a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis[J]. Int J Hyperthermia, 2024, 41(1):2310019. DOI:10.1080/02656736.2024.2310019.
[7]
Salari S, Lindheim SR. To see or not to see? That is the miscarriage management question[J]. Fertil Steril, 2024, 122(6):1022-1023. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.09.021.
[8]
Di Spiezio Sardo A, Zizolfi B, Saccone G, et al. Hysteroscopic resection vs ultrasound-guided dilation and evacuation for treatment of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy:a randomized clinical trial[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2023, 229(4):437.e1-437.e7. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.04.038.
[9]
Fu P, Sun H, Zhang L, et al. Efficacy and safety of treatment modalities for cesarean scar pregnancy:a systematic review and network meta-analysis[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM, 2024, 6(8):101328. DOI:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101328.
[10]
杨雪, 夏恩兰, 马宁, 等. 胚物残留的治疗现状及进展[J]. 中国医刊, 2022, 57(12):1298-1301. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-1070.2022.12.006.
[11]
Bortoletto P, Romanski PA, Schatz-Siemers N, et al. Retained products of conception as an aetiology for endometritis[J]. BJOG, 2022, 129(2):185-187. DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.16916.
[12]
Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Goldstein SR. Early first-trimester transvaginal ultrasound screening for cesarean scar pregnancy in patients with previous cesarean delivery:analysis of the evidence[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2024, 231(6):618-625. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.06.041.
[13]
Verberkt C, Jordans IPM, van den Bosch T, et al. How to perform standardized sonographic examination of Cesarean scar pregnancy in the first trimester[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2024, 64(3):412-418. DOI:10.1002/uog.27604.
[14]
洪莉. 剖宫产瘢痕妊娠宫腔镜手术治疗[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2018, 34(8):854-858. DOI:10.19538/j.fk2018080107.
[15]
Sundararajan S, Roy S, Polanski LT. The accuracy of ultrasound scan in diagnosing retained products of conception:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2024, 230(5):512-531.e3. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.11.1243.
[16]
Chawla S, Sharma R. Retained Products of conception (RPOC):diagnosis,complication & management[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol India, 2023, 73(5):374-380. DOI:10.1007/s13224-023-01873-6.
[17]
Noguchi T, Shiro M, Nanjo S, et al. Risk factors of retained products of conception after miscarriage or termination with gemeprost in the second trimester of pregnancy:a retrospective case-controlled study in Japanese population[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol, 2022, 42(3):501-504. DOI:10.1080/01443615.2021.1916810.
[18]
George JS, Naert MN, Lanes A, et al. Utility of office hysteroscopy in diagnosing retained products of conception following early pregnancy loss after in vitro fertilization[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2023, 142(5):1019-1027. DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000005382.
[19]
中华医学会妇产科学分会计划生育学组, 中国医师协会妇产科医师分会生育调控学组. 中孕期剖宫产瘢痕妊娠临床管理专家共识(2024年版)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2024, 40(11):1108-1113. DOI:10.19538/j.fk2024110112.
[20]
Ma R, Chen S, Xu W, et al. Surgical treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy based on the three-category system:a retrospective analysis[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2024, 24(1):687. DOI:10.1186/s12884-024-06887-0.
[21]
Yang M, Cao L, Yan J, et al. Risk factors associated with the failure of initial treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2023, 162(3):937-944. DOI:10.1002/ijgo.14761.
[22]
Lei Y, Zhang N, Liu Y, et al. A prediction nomogram for residual after negative pressure aspiration for endogenic cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: a retrospective study[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2025, 25(1):107. DOI:10.1186/s12884-025-07255-2.
[23]
侯倩男, 何丽. 机器人赋能经阴道自然腔道内镜手术——妇科微创手术的未来[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2025, 41(7):706-710. DOI:10.19538/j.fk2025070109.
[24]
葛蓓蕾, 孙静. 保留生育功能的经阴道自然腔道内镜手术应用与进展[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2025, 41(7):683-687. DOI:10.19538/j.fk2025070103.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China(82301962)
Peking University Third Hospital Clincial Key Project(BYSYZD2021014)
PDF(901 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/