Uterine artery embolization compared with methotrexate for the management of pregnancy implanted within a cesarean scar.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 19527897.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.038.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of uterine artery embolization (UAE) vs systemic methotrexate (MTX) for pregnancy within a cesarean scar. Seventy-two women with pregnancy within cesarean scar were randomly allocated to a UAE group (37 cases) or an MTX group (35 cases), which all was followed by suction curettage. The primary outpoints include bleeding loss, serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin level, and side effects. The bleeding volumes were 36.93 +/- 6.01 mL in the UAE group and 415.63 +/- 68.37 mL in the MTX group (P < .001). The hospitalization time was 11.73 +/- 0.80 days in the UAE group and 39.63 +/- 4.57 days in the MTX group (P < .001). There was no severe side effect in both groups. For pregnancy within a cesarean scar, UAE followed by suction curettage appears to have more advantage and may be a priority option.
Medical subject headings
- Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal
- Methotrexate
- Pregnancy, Ectopic
- Uterine Artery Embolization