Laparoscopic Resection of Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy after Unsuccessful Systemic Methotrexate Treatment.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To present a case of a cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy treated by laparoscopic resection followed by isthmocele repair.

DESIGN: A case report.

SETTINGS: The University Gynecology Clinic of the Emergency Clinical City Hospital Timișoara, Timișoara, România.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean scar pregnancy is a rare form of ectopic pregnancy. In recent years, its prevalence has risen because of the increasing number of cesarean sections. An early diagnosis can lead to early management, decreasing the risk of life-threatening complications such as uterine rupture and massive hemorrhage. Many therapeutic options are available, medical and surgical, but the current literature suggests that the laparoscopic approach with ectopic pregnancy resection is the best option.

CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 30-year-old woman with a previous cesarean section in 2012 who was diagnosed by transvaginal ultrasound with a 6-week live pregnancy implanted at the level of the cesarean scar. The initial management was the administration of a 2-dose methotrexate protocol, but after 72 hours the transvaginal ultrasound showed an embryo with cardiac activity still present associated with an increased beta human chorionic gonadotropin level. We decided on laparoscopic surgical treatment, aiming to extract the pregnancy and repair the scar defect. A similar case was presented by Mahgoub et al [1], but their case had a different evolution, with decreasing levels of hCG.

INTERVENTIONS: In order to reduce the blood loss, the anterior trunks of the hypogastric arteries were clipped. The side wall peritoneum was cut bilaterally, and the ureters and the hypogastric arteries were dissected. Next, we performed the dissection of the vesicouterine space. Because of the previous cesarean section, the identification of the correct dissection plane was difficult. A uterine manipulator was used to facilitate the dissection. The exact location of the gestational sac was demonstrated using intraoperative transvaginal ultrasound. To reduce the bleeding, Glypressin (Ferring GmbH, Saint Prex, Switzerland) was injected at the level of the uterine scar. The cesarean scar was cut using a monopolar knife. The gestation sac was reached easily and then extracted from the abdominal cavity with the use of an endobag. In order to obtain proper healing, the margins of the scar were resected using cold scissors. The hysterotomy was closed using a double-layered suture with 2.0 Vicryl (Ethicon Inc., Cincinnati, OH). We used methylene blue to verify the tightness of the suture. The final step was the removal of the clips.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The operative time was 85 minutes with minimal blood loss of about 20 mL. The patient recovered well and was discharged 2 days after the procedure. A transvaginal ultrasound was performed 1 month after the surgery showing good healing of the anterior uterine wall.

CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach with excision and repair of the uterine wall represents a safe and efficient therapeutic option for the treatment of the cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy.