Uterine artery chemoembolization compared with uterine artery embolization combined with prior to hysteroscopy and curettage in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy

Background: To compare evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safetyefficacy of uterine artery chemoembolization (UACE) and versus uterine artery embolization (UAE) prior to combined with hysteroscopy and curettage in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP)Methodsology: A totalThe clinical data of 84 patients with CSP who underwent UACE or U AE combined with hysteroscopy and-guied uterine curettage were enrolled in the retrospective cohort study from August 2016 to April 2021 were retrospectively collected. They were divided into UACE group (n = 39) and UAE group (n = 45) according to different surgical methods. The clinical characteristicsgeneral data, operattreatment success rate,ion, postoperative outcomeconditions, and re-pregnancyproductive outcomes of the two groups were observed and compared and analyzed between the two groups.Results: The overall success rate of 84 patients was 96.43%, the complication rate was 19.05%, and the serious complication rate was 1.19%. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the success rate of operation, complication rate, serious complication rate, UAE operativeon time, hysteroscopic operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, duration of postoperative hospital stay, β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) reductiondecrease on postoperative day 1, and re-pregnancyproductive outcome (P > 0.05). The time of menstruation recoveryto resumption of menses was shorter in the UACE group than in the UAE group (P < 0.05).Conclusion: UACE was as effective and safe as UAE in the treatment of CSPor UAE combined with hysteroscopy is safe and effective in the treatment of CSP, and the time of menstruation recovery was shorter. UACE reduced the time to resumption of menses compared with UAE, with a similar both of which had similar re-pregnancyproductive outcomes.