scholarly journals Giant uterine artery pseudoaneurysm after a missed miscarriage termination in a cesarean scar pregnancy

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yun Mou ◽  
Yuezhen Xu ◽  
Ying Hu ◽  
Tianan Jiang
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiao Wang ◽  
Qing Yang ◽  
Ningning Zhang ◽  
Dandan Wang

Abstract Background Pseudoaneurysms are formed when a local arterial wall ruptures, leading to hemorrhage and hematoma adjacent to the artery. Continuous perfusion of the injured artery increases the pressure in the lumen of the pseudoaneurysm. It may rupture and lead to massive hemorrhage that could be life-threatening. Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is an ectopic pregnancy where the gestational sac is implanted in the cesarean scar. Uterine artery pseudoaneurysm (UAP) after CSP treatment is rare. Case presentation We report the case of a 36-year-old Chinese woman who presented with acute massive vaginal bleeding 53 days after transabdominal scar pregnancy excision. Doppler ultrasound confirmed UAP. Selective uterine artery embolization (UAE) failed because of the thin and curved blood vessels. The lesion decreased in size after transvaginal ultrasound-guided direct thrombin injection (UGTI); however, massive vaginal bleeding recurred and endangered the patient’s life. The uterus was removed thereafter. Conclusions UAP is a rare complication after CSP treatment that can lead to fatal massive hemorrhage. Ultrasound should be reexamined regularly after treatment of CSP. In case of unexplained vaginal bleeding, we should be alert to the existence of UAP and the possibility of rupture and take effective diagnosis and treatment measures promptly.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. e00286
Author(s):  
Danielle Glassman ◽  
Ruchi Karsalia ◽  
Issam Moubarak ◽  
Mark V. Sauer ◽  
Ashima Singla

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 030006052096437
Author(s):  
Hongan Tian ◽  
Shunzhen Li ◽  
Wanwan Jia ◽  
Kaihu Yu ◽  
Guangyao Wu

Objective To observe the hemostatic effect of prophylactic uterine artery embolization (UAE) in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) and to examine the risk factors for poor hemostasis. Methods Clinical data of 841 patients with CSP who underwent prophylactic UAE and curettage were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the hemorrhage volume during curettage. A hemorrhage volume ≥200 mL was termed as poor hemostasis. The risk factors of poor hemostasis were analyzed and complications within 60 days postoperation were recorded. Results Among the 841 patients, 6.30% (53/841) had poor postoperative hemostasis. The independent risk factors of poor hemostasis were gestational sac size, parity, embolic agent diameter (>1000 μm), multivessel blood supply, and incomplete embolization. The main postoperative complications within 60 days after UAE were abdominal pain, low fever, nausea and vomiting, and buttock pain, with incidence rates of 71.22% (599/841), 47.44% (399/841), 39.12% (329/841), and 36.39% (306/841), respectively. Conclusions Prophylactic UAE before curettage in patients with CSP is safe and effective in reducing intraoperative hemorrhage. Gestational sac size, parity, embolic agent diameter, multivessel blood supply, and incomplete embolization of all arteries supplying blood to the uterus are risk factors of poor hemostasis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1084
Author(s):  
Yuji Shiina

The concept of intrauterine neo-vascular lesions after pregnancy, initially called placental polyps, has changed gradually. Now, based on diagnostic imaging, such lesions are defined as retained products of conception (RPOC) with vascularization. The lesions appear after delivery or miscarriage, and they are accompanied by frequent abundant vascularization in the myometrium attached to the remnant. Many of these vascular lesions have been reported to resolve spontaneously within a few months. Acquired arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) must be considered in the differential diagnosis of RPOC with vascularization. AVMs are errors of morphogenesis. The lesions start to be constructed at the time of placenta formation. These lesions do not show spontaneous regression. Although these two lesions are recognized as neo-vascular lesions, neo-vascular lesions on imaging may represent conditions other than these two lesions (e.g., peritrophoblastic flow, uterine artery pseudoaneurysm, and villous-derived malignancies). Detecting vasculature at the placenta–myometrium interface and classifying vascular diseases according to hemodynamics in the remnant would facilitate the development of specific treatments.


2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 687-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wataru Isono ◽  
Ryo Tsutsumi ◽  
Osamu Wada-Hiraike ◽  
Akihisa Fujimoto ◽  
Yutaka Osuga ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akihiro Takeda ◽  
Kayoko Kato ◽  
Masahiko Mori ◽  
Kotaro Sakai ◽  
Takashi Mitsui ◽  
...  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 411
Author(s):  
Felice Sorrentino ◽  
Vincenzo De Feo ◽  
Guglielmo Stabile ◽  
Raffaele Tinelli ◽  
Maurizio Nicola D’Alterio ◽  
...  

Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a rare form of ectopic pregnancy which represents a consequence of a previous cesarean section. It is associated with major maternal morbidity and mortality and has potential implications on future fertility. Because of possible serious complications, CSP should be swiftly diagnosed and treated. There is no management protocol for this rare, life-threatening condition, and each patient should be evaluated individually. Several types of conservative treatment have been used to treat cesarean scar pregnancy: dilation and curettage (D&C), excision of trophoblastic tissues, local or systemic administration of methotrexate, bilateral hypogastric artery ligation, and selective uterine artery embolization with curettage and/or methotrexate administration. In our study we present a cesarean scar pregnancy of a 40-year-old woman who was treated with angiographic uterine artery embolization (UAE) followed by hysteroscopic diode laser resection. Our combined UAE–hysteroscopic laser surgery appears to offer an effective, safe, and minimally invasive surgical treatment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-274
Author(s):  
Aaron Rohr ◽  
Hasnain Hasham ◽  
Aaron Frenette ◽  
Ryan Ash ◽  
Philip Johnson ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document