Management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
Registered users can also download a PDF or listen to a podcast of this Pearl.
Log in now, or create a free account to access bonus Pearls features.
Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), also referred to as cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, was first reported in 1978. CSP is rare, occurring in 1 in 1800 to 2656 pregnancies, and it is, on average, diagnosed at 7.5 ± 2.5 weeks gestational age. More than 50% of CSPs occur in individuals with a single prior cesarean delivery. Ultrasonography with color Doppler is the primary diagnostic modality. Diagnosis of CSP requires a positive pregnancy test along with key sonographic findings, including an empty uterine cavity and endocervix and implantation of the gestational sac in the cesarean scar. CSPs are described to be endogenic (“on the scar”), with the pregnancy growing within the uterine cavity, or exogenic (“in the niche”), with the pregnancy deeply implanted in the scar and growing towards the abdomen and bladder. The pathogenesis of CSP is incompletely understood but is hypothesized to result from blastocyst implantation in the dehiscence tract in the cesarean scar. In one case series, findings on histopathologic analysis of CSP were indistinguishable from those of placenta accreta spectrum.
Knowledge is limited about the natural history of CSPs. CSPs can result in live births; however, they are complicated by high rates (50%-100%) of hemorrhage, cesarean hysterectomy, and placenta accreta spectrum. Accordingly, expectant management of CSP is not recommended except in the case of nonviable CSP. Individuals who decline expectant management should be counseled on the risk of significant obstetric complications, including death, preterm labor, and uterine rupture. Delivery should be planned for 34 0/7 to 35 6/7 weeks gestational age at a facility with the resources and expertise to manage massive hemorrhage and cesarean hysterectomy.
Treatment options for CSP include medical management, minimally invasive techniques, surgical management, and various combinations of treatments. Optimal treatment is uncertain given the lack of randomized controlled trials and direct comparisons. Despite limited data, primary resection via transvaginal or laparoscopic techniques should be considered because the efficacy for either method exceeds 95% and complications are rarely reported. Minimally invasive operative resection also allows for scar revision. Systemic methotrexate should be avoided as a single treatment given a higher rate of complications (13%). Intragestational methotrexate is preferred and can be administered alone or in combination with other treatment. Uterine artery embolization with dilation and curettage can also be considered first-line treatment, as the success rate is higher than 93% and the complication rate is low. The addition of hysteroscopy to uterine artery embolization and dilation and curettage only slightly increases efficacy and decreases complications, but it is associated with increased cost. Small case series have reported high success of resolution (97%) and low complication rates (4%) with the use of a cervical ripening double balloon catheter that compresses the CSP blood supply. A gravid hysterectomy is an option for individuals who do not desire future fertility.
Given uncertainty regarding optimal management, the treatment options offered should be influenced by imaging findings, case complexity, patient preference, and provider/institutional capability. Patients with CSP should be counseled about the recurrence risk (5%-40%) and associated complications in subsequent pregnancies.
Glenn TL, Bembry J, Findley AD, et al. Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy: Current Management Strategies. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2018 May;73(5):293-302. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000561. PMID: 29850919.
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM); Miller R, Timor-Tritsch IE, Gyamfi-Bannerman C. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Consult Series #49: cesarean scar pregnancy [published correction appears in Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224(1):106]. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(5):B2-B14. PMID: 31972162.
Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A. Unforeseen consequences of the increasing rate of cesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jul;207(1):14-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.007. Epub 2012 Mar 10. Erratum in: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;210(4):371-4. PMID: 22516620.
Published February 6, 2022
********** Notice Regarding Use ************
The Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inc. (“SASGOG”) is committed to accuracy and will review and validate all Pearls on an ongoing basis to reflect current practice.
This document is designed to aid practitioners in providing appropriate obstetric and gynecologic care. Recommendations are derived from major society guidelines and high-quality evidence when available, supplemented by the opinion of the author and editorial board when necessary. It should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed.
Variations in practice may be warranted when, in the reasonable judgment of the treating clinician, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources, or advances in knowledge or technology. SASGOG reviews the articles regularly; however, its publications may not reflect the most recent evidence. While we make every effort to present accurate and reliable information, this publication is provided “as is” without any warranty of accuracy, reliability, or otherwise, either express or implied. SASGOG does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse the products or services of any firm, organization, or person. Neither SASGOG nor its respective officers, directors, members, employees, or agents will be liable for any loss, damage, or claim with respect to any liabilities, including direct, special, indirect, or consequential damages, incurred in connection with this publication or reliance on the information presented.
Copyright 2022 The Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inc. All rights reserved. No re-print, duplication, or posting allowed without prior written consent.Back to Search Results