中国中西医结合影像学杂志   2020, Vol. 18 Issue (1): 74-76
0
彩色多普勒超声指标与瘢痕妊娠清宫术中出血量的相关研究[PDF全文]
何美情1 , 艾红2 , 彭健美1 , 任媛1 , 高燕华1 , 管湘平1
1. 陕西省人民医院超声诊断中心,陕西 西安 710068;
2. 西安交通大学第一附属医院,陕西 西安 710061
摘要目的: 探讨彩色多普勒超声在瘢痕妊娠(CSP)治疗中的临床价值。方法: 选取87例CSP孕妇,在子宫动脉栓塞术(UAE)后行清宫术,并依据术中出血量分为出血组(>200 mL)26例和对照组(< 200 mL)61例。比较2组UAE前后血流的RI、孕囊大小、子宫下段肌层厚度、子宫下段缺损面积及血流丰富程度。结果: 2组一般资料未见明显差异,栓塞后孕囊周围血供明显减少,孕囊越大,子宫下段缺损面积越大,术中出血越多;子宫下段肌层厚度越薄,越易出血。结论: UAE能有效减少孕囊周边血供,超声指标可预测术中出血量。
关键词瘢痕妊娠    超声检查, 多普勒, 彩色    子宫动脉栓塞术    
Correlation between Doppler ultrasound and the amount of bleeding in cesarean section scar pregnancy
He Meiqing , Ai Hong , Peng Jianmei , Ren Yuan , Gao Yanhua , Guan Xiangpin
Department of Ultrasonography, Shaanxi Provincal People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China
Abstract: Objective: To explore the clinical value of Doppler ultrasound in the management of interventional therapy for scar pregnancy. Methods: A total of 87 pregnancies with cesarean section pregnancy were enrolled, and uterine artery embolization was performed. Subsequently, the uterus was divided into two groups according to the amount of intraoperative blood loss. The bleeding group was more than 200 mL, and the control group was less than 200 mL. The flow resistance index before and after uterine artery embolization. The size of the gestational sac, the thickness of the lower uterine layer, and the defect area of the lower uterus were measured and recorded. The blood supply was observed and the changes of these parameters were analyzed. Results: There was no significant difference in the general information between the two groups. The blood supply around the gestational sac was significantly reduced after embolization. The larger the gestational sac and the larger the defect area of the lower uterus, the more intraoperative hemorrhage. The thinner the thickness of the lower uterine muscle layer, the more likely the bleeding. Conclusions: Uterine artery embolization can effectively reduce the blood supply around the scar pregnancy, ultrasound indicators can predict intraoperative blood loss.
Key words: Cesarean section scar pregnancy    Ultrasonography, Doppler, color    Uterine artery embolization    

剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(cesarean scar pregnancy,CSP)是一种少见而危险的异位妊娠。随着我国剖宫产率的逐年上升,CSP的发生率也随之升高,若处理不当会导致大出血、子宫切除,甚至危及母婴生命[1-4]。彩色多普勒超声可评估CSP子宫动脉栓塞术(uterine arterial embolism,UAE)前后各项超声指标的改变,以及预测清宫术中的出血量,为患者提供最好的个体化治疗结局。

1 资料与方法 1.1 一般资料

选取2011年8月至2018年12月陕西省人民医院经术后病理证实的87例CSP孕妇,年龄18~45岁,平均(33.0±6.5)岁。依据术中出血量分为出血组(>200 mL)26例;对照组(<200 mL)61例。87例均先行UAE,后行清宫术,均有一次剖宫产史和停经史,均为首次瘢痕妊娠,一般情况良好,无双胎及多胎妊娠,无特殊并发症。

1.2 仪器与方法

使用GE Vluson E8和E10超声诊断仪,经阴道探头频率5~9 MHz;观察UAE前后孕囊周围血流的丰富程度,并依据Alder[5]分级进行分级:0~Ⅰ级为少量血流,Ⅱ~Ⅲ级为血流丰富。清宫术中失血量依据Jurkovic等[6]提出的方法确定,即由手术医师半定量确定。测量UAE前后RI、孕囊大小(最大测值)、子宫下段肌层厚度及子宫下段缺损面积。所有数据均测量3次,取平均值。

1.3 统计学处理

采用SPSS 13.0软件对符合正态分布数据行t检验,不符合正态分布数据行秩和检验,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2组体质量指数(BMI)、孕次、年龄、孕龄差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)(表 1)。UAE后85例(97.7%)孕囊周边彩色血流量明显减少,由术前的Ⅱ~Ⅲ级减少为0~Ⅰ级(图 1,2),2例(2.3%)栓塞前后血流量未见明显改变。2组孕囊大小、子宫下段缺损面积、子宫下段肌层厚度及RI差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)(表 2)。

表 1 2组一般情况比较

图 1 女,34岁,剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSP),孕64 d  图 1a  子宫动脉栓塞(UAE)术前孕囊周边Ⅱ~ Ⅲ级血流  图 1b  UAE术后孕囊周边0~Ⅰ级血流,术中出血量约75 mL

表 2 2组超声指标比较

3 讨论

CSP是指受精卵着床于前次剖宫产子宫切口处的一种异位妊娠,发病机制目前尚未完全清楚。Wozniak等[7]研究得出,剖腹产切口呈锯齿状易形成憩室,其内血液可影响宫颈黏液的质量,从而影响精液,导致精子运输能力减弱,后期可能导致CSP。CSP时,胎盘绒毛侵入子宫壁,甚至穿透子宫肌层直至子宫浆膜层;妊娠后期绒毛穿透浆膜并侵入周围组织和器官,导致子宫破裂、大出血、多器官衰竭,危及孕妇生命[8]。因此,CSP的早诊断及治疗尤为重要。

超声是CSP有效的诊断和监测手段,可测量孕囊大小、子宫下段肌层厚度,CDFI可了解其周边血供情况。UAE能临时阻断子宫血流灌注,减少CSP周边血供,进而减少术中出血。本研究UAE后97.7%孕囊周边彩色血流量明显降低,2.3%孕囊周边血流量变化不大。Liu等[9]研究证实UAE可明显减少孕囊周边血管数量和血流的灌注。

本研究对CSP多个超声参数进行比较,结果发现与出血相关的参数有:孕囊大小、缺损面积、子宫下段肌层厚度及孕囊周边血供情况,与Liu等[9]报道相符。而且子宫下段肌层越薄,胚胎植入程度越深,越不易清除,术中出血量越多。Zosmer等[10]对10例CSP进行了一项前瞻性研究,9例在妊娠中晚期发生胎盘植入,26~38周分娩时,5例保守治疗,其余5例行子宫切除术,证实CSP是胎盘植入的前兆。

有研究[11]发现孕囊大小与CSP术中出血呈正相关。Paquette等[12]证实通过测量残留的子宫肌层厚度可早期评估子宫瘢痕,后期可帮助识别并发症风险。国内学者[13]也报道了孕囊或包块大小与CSP术中出血量呈正相关。Liu等[9]的研究中首次应用三维容积成像模式测量子宫下段肌层缺损体积,且证实缺损体积与CSP术中出血亦呈正相关。子宫下段肌层较大缺损使子宫下段变薄,导致肌层再生困难和大量出血。

Paquette等[12]发现多次剖宫产会增加CSP的风险,可能与瘢痕表面积增加有关。Jurkovic等[14]也报道CSP时30%~40%的患者会出现胎盘异常植入,导致分娩时出现无法控制的出血,且非正常植入的胎盘占所有子宫切除术的50%~65%。

总之,孕囊越大、子宫下段肌层越薄、缺损面积越大,术中出血风险越大。UAE能有效减少孕囊周边血供,超声可早发现、早诊断CSP,并预测术中出血量,帮助临床提高治疗效果。

参考文献
[1]
石军荣, 秦金金, 王伟明, 等. 剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠57例临床研究[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2014, 49(1): 18-21. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2014.01.006
[2]
Riaz RM, Williams TR, Craig BM, et al. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy:imaging features, current treatment options, and clinical outcomes[J]. Abdom Imaging, 2015, 40: 2589-2599. DOI:10.1007/s00261-015-0472-2
[3]
Litwicka K, Greco E. Caesarean scar pregnancy:a review of management options[J]. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 23: 415-421. DOI:10.1097/GCO.0b013e32834cef0c
[4]
Timor-Tritsch IE, Khatib N, Monteagudo A, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancies:experience of 60 cases[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2015, 34: 601-610. DOI:10.7863/ultra.34.4.601
[5]
Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer:preliminary findings[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16: 553-559. DOI:10.1016/0301-5629(90)90020-D
[6]
Jurkovic D, Knez J, Appiah A, et al. Surgical treatment of Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy:efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided suction curettage[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 47: 511-517. DOI:10.1002/uog.15857
[7]
Wozniak A, Pyra K, Tinto HR, et al. Ultrasonographic criteria of cesarean scar defect evaluation[J]. J Ultrason, 2018, 18: 162. DOI:10.15557/JoU.2018.0024
[8]
Ash A, Smith A, Maxwell D. Caesarean scar pregnancy[J]. BJOG, 2007, 114: 253-263. DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01237.x
[9]
Liu J, Chai Y, Yu Y, et al. The value of 3-dimensional color Doppler in predicting intraoperative hemorrhage for cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Medicine, 2018, 97: 33.
[10]
Zosmer N, Fuller J, Shaikh H, et al. Natural history of early first-trimester pregnancies implanted in cesarean scars[J]. Ultra-sound Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 46: 367-375. DOI:10.1002/uog.14775
[11]
Osborn DA, Williams TR, Craig BM. Cesarean scar pregnancy: sonographic and magnetic resonance imaging findings, complications, and treatment[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2012, 31: 1449-1456. DOI:10.7863/jum.2012.31.9.1449
[12]
Paquette K, Markey S, Roberge S, et al. First and third trimester uterine scar thickness in women with previous caesarean:a prospective comparative study[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Can, 2019, 41: 59-63. DOI:10.1016/j.jogc.2018.02.020
[13]
陈清华, 陈华娟, 王海花. 超声评分评估瘢痕妊娠终止术预后的临床价值[J]. 影像诊断与介入放射学, 2017, 26(5): 374-377. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-8001.2017.05.004
[14]
Jurkovic D, Hillaby K, Woelfer B, et al. First-trimester diagnosis and management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment cesarean section scar[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2003, 21: 220-227. DOI:10.1002/uog.56