Uterine artery embolization with and without local methotrexate infusion for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy

ObjectiveTo compare the clinical value of uterine artery embolization (UAE) with local methotrexate (MTX) infusion to embolization without MTX in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancies (CSPs).Materials and methodsFrom January 2009 to December 2013, 50 patients with CSP treated with UAE receiving or not receiving local MTX infusion prior to curettage were analyzed retrospectively. Twenty-two patients were offered UAE with local MTX infusion prior to curettage (UAE + MTX group), whereas 28 patients received UAE alone prior to curettage (UAE group). Clinical data and the outcomes were analyzed, followed by a brief review of the published literature summarizing what is known about UAE with and without MTX for the treatment of CSP.ResultsUAE was successful in 42 of 50 cases (84%), with complications occurring in only five patients. There were no significant differences in the success rate, complication rate, recovery time, or hospitalization costs between the UAE + MTX group and the UAE group. However, blood loss in the UAE + MTX group was significantly higher than in the UAE group.ConclusionUAE with or without local MTX infusion might be an effective treatment for CSP. Compared with UAE alone, UAE with local MTX infusion did not dramatically improve the therapeutic effect of UAE. A larger and more comprehensive random control study is warranted to better evaluate the therapeutic effects of UAE in the treatment of CSP.