International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
High-intensity focused ultrasound compared with uterine artery chemoembolization with methotrexate for the management of cesarean scar pregnancy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Wenping, Chen Yan, Yang Yamei, Qu Dacheng, Jiang Jing
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) versus uterine artery chemoembolization with methotrexate for the management of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).
METHODS: A total of 170 women with CSP were enrolled in the retrospective cohort study from April 2016 to September 2020. One hundred women received HIFU followed by suction curettage, and 70 women were treated with uterine artery chemoembolization followed by suction curettage.
RESULTS: The median blood loss during suction curettage was 20 ml (range 2-800 ml) in the HIFU group versus 20 ml (range 5-200 ml) in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.837). The mean time for β-human chorionic gonadotropin normalization was 28.52 ± 10.82 days versus 26.69 ± 8.97 days (P = 0.246), respectively. The mean time of menstruation recovery was 34.36 ± 10.63 days versus 31.93 ± 8.53 days (P = 0.114), respectively. The incidence of adverse effects in the HIFU group was lower than that in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.028). The median hospitalization time in the HIFU group was longer than that in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.000).
CONCLUSION: HIFU was as effective and safe as uterine artery chemoembolization in the management of CSP, and the incidence of adverse effects was lower.
METHODS: A total of 170 women with CSP were enrolled in the retrospective cohort study from April 2016 to September 2020. One hundred women received HIFU followed by suction curettage, and 70 women were treated with uterine artery chemoembolization followed by suction curettage.
RESULTS: The median blood loss during suction curettage was 20 ml (range 2-800 ml) in the HIFU group versus 20 ml (range 5-200 ml) in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.837). The mean time for β-human chorionic gonadotropin normalization was 28.52 ± 10.82 days versus 26.69 ± 8.97 days (P = 0.246), respectively. The mean time of menstruation recovery was 34.36 ± 10.63 days versus 31.93 ± 8.53 days (P = 0.114), respectively. The incidence of adverse effects in the HIFU group was lower than that in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.028). The median hospitalization time in the HIFU group was longer than that in the chemoembolization group (P = 0.000).
CONCLUSION: HIFU was as effective and safe as uterine artery chemoembolization in the management of CSP, and the incidence of adverse effects was lower.