Laparoscopic Excision of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy with Scar Revision
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, ISSN: 1553-4650, Vol: 28, Issue: 4, Page: 746-747
2021
- 15Citations
- 2Usage
- 20Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes15
- 15
- CrossRef6
- Usage2
- Abstract Views2
- Captures20
- Readers20
- 20
Article Description
To demonstrate our technique for robot-assisted laparoscopic ectopic pregnancy excision and concomitant scar revision. We present a stepwise narrated demonstration of our primary laparoscopic technique. Although cesarean scar pregnancy is rare, it leads to life-threatening complications and often emergent hysterectomy [ 1, 2 ]. Because of its rarity, there is a scarcity of centers with high-volume experience with its treatment, and no standardized diagnostic or management guidelines are yet available [ 3, 4 ]. Recent evidence suggests that primary surgical management may be superior to medical or radiologic management as the latter methods carry a high reintervention rate [5]. An additional consideration in selecting a treatment method is a patient's plans for future fertility, as cesarean scar defects are associated with secondary infertility. Evidence shows that repair of cesarean scar defects decreases the likelihood of future recurrence and secondary infertility, thus it may be pertinent to select a management strategy that allows for the accomplishment of both ectopic pregnancy removal and defect revision. We present our primary laparoscopic approach to ectopic pregnancy excision and revision of the cesarean scar defect using techniques rooted in evidence and robust experience. Robot-assisted laparoscopic excision of a cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy with concomitant scar revision demonstrating key strategies to minimize blood loss and preserve future fertility. (1) A laparoscopic approach allows for concomitant ectopic pregnancy removal followed by cesarean scar revision. (2) Generous use of dilute vasopressin and purposeful application of electrosurgical energy provides hemostasis without the use of more invasive measures such as vascular clips or uterine artery balloons. (3) A multilayer closure is associated with a lower risk of wedge defect formation and uterine rupture. (4) Diagnostic hysteroscopy is a useful tool for identifying the location of the scar defect, assessing for an adequate repair, and identifying potential additional uterine pathology. Primary laparoscopic management is not only the most effective method with the lowest complication rates but is an approach that allows for simultaneous repair and revision of the cesarean scar defect. We demonstrate easily adaptable techniques for maintaining hemostasis, minimizing injury to normal myometrium, and creating multilayer closures that lead to successful revisions with minimal impact to subsequent fertility.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553465020303186; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.06.017; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85088119719&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32603870; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1553465020303186; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/obgyn/39; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=obgyn; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.06.017
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know