mvjrМедицинский вестник Юга РоссииMedical Herald of the South of Russia2219-80752618-7876The Rostov State Medical University10.21886/2219-8075-2022-13-2-72-79mvjr-1571Research ArticleАКУШЕРСТВО И ГИНЕКОЛОГИЯOBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGYЗона имплантации как эхографический критерий идентификации типов рубцовой и истмической беременностей у женщин с рубцом на маткеImplantation zone as an echographic criterion identification of types of cicatricial and isthmic pregnancies in women with a scar on the uterushttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5955-7979ЭсетовМ. А.EsetovM. A.

Эсетов Мурад Азединович, д.м.н., доцент, доцент кафедры лучевой диагностики и лучевой терапии с усовершенствованием врачей

Махачкала

Murad A. Esetov, Dr. Med. Sci., Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Radiation Diagnostics and Radiation Therapy with the improvement of Doctors 

Makhachkala

esetov06@rambler.ruЭсетовА. М.EsetovA. M.

Эсетов Азедин Мурадович, к.м.н., доцент кафедры акушерства и гинекологии лечебного факультета 

Махачкала

Azedin M. Esetov, Cand. Med. Sci., Associate Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine 

Makhachkala

Дагестанский государственный медицинский университет; Медицинский Центр «Целитель»РоссияDagestan State Medical University; Medical Center «Healer»Russian FederationДагестанский государственный медицинский университетРоссияDagestan State Medical UniversityRussian Federation2022060720221327279Copyright © Эсетов М.А., Эсетов А.М., 20222022Эсетов М.А., Эсетов А.М.Esetov M.A., Esetov A.M.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.medicalherald.ru/jour/article/view/1571Цель

Цель: представление установления зоны имплантации плодного яйца при ультразвуковой диагностике в 5 – 7 недель для дифференциации типов рубцовой и истмической беременностей у женщин с рубцом на матке после кесарева сечения.

Материалы и методы

Материалы и методы: в исследование включены 11 женщин с низкой имплантацией плодного яйца при наличии рубца на матке. Всем проводили УЗИ трансабдоминальным и трансвагинальными доступами в 5 – 7 недель беременности для установления места имплантации плодного яйца относительно рубца на матке.

Результаты

Результаты: по результатам ультразвуковой оценки зоны имплантации плодного яйца в 5 – 7 недель были дифференцированы: тип 1 рубцовой беременности (1 случай); тип 2 рубцовой беременности (7случаев) и низкая имплантация по задней стенке матки на уровне рубца интактно от него (2 случая).

Выводы

Выводы: УЗИ в 5 – 7 недель является необходимым методом исследования у женщин с рубцом на матке для диагностики рубцовой беременности. Установление зоны имплантации плодного яйца является инструментом, позволяющим дифференцировать типы рубцовой и истмической беременностей.   

Objective: the purpose of this publication is to present the establishment of the implantation zone of the fetal egg during ultrasound diagnostics at 5-7 weeks to differentiate the types of cicatricial and isthmian pregnancies in women with a scar on the uterus after cesarean section. Materials and methods: the study included 11 women with low implantation of the fetal egg in the presence of a scar on the uterus. All underwent ultrasound with transabdominal and transvaginal approaches at 5–7 weeks of pregnancy to establish the place of implantation of the fetal egg relative to the scar on the uterus. Results: according to the results of ultrasound evaluation of the implantation zone of the fetal egg in 5–7 weeks were differentiated: type 1 of scar pregnancy (1 case); type 2 of scar pregnancy (7 cases) and low implantation along the posterior wall of the uterus at the level of the scar intact from it (2 cases). Conclusions: ultrasound at 5–7 weeks is a necessary method of examination in women with a scar on the uterus for the diagnosis of scar pregnancy. The establishment of the implantation zone of the fetal egg is a tool that allows differentiating the types of cicatricial and isthmic pregnancies.

рубцовая беременностьистмическая беременностьультразвуковая диагностикапервый триместрплодное яйцоимплантацияscar pregnancyisthmic pregnancyultrasound diagnosticsfirst trimesterfetal eggimplantationReferencesЭсетов М.А., Эсетов А.М. Эхография в эмбриональном периоде. Беременность в рубце на матке. М.: Издательский дом Видар-М, 2020: 95-111.Esetov M.A., Esetov A.M. Jehografija v jem-brional'nom periode. Beremennost' v rubce na matke. Moscow: Izdatel'skij dom Vidar-M, 2020. (In Russ.)Rotas M.A., Haberman S., Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006; 107 (6): 1373–1381. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000218690.24494.ce.Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1373-81. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000218690.24494.ce.McKenna D.A., Poder L., Goldman M., Goldstein R.B. Role of sonography in the recognition, assessment, and treatment of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies. J. Ultrasound Med. 2008; 27 (5): 779–783. https://dx.doi.org/10.7863/jum.2008.27.5.779.McKenna DA, Poder L, Goldman M, Goldstein RB. Role of sonography in the recognition, assessment, and treatment of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27(5):779-83. DOI: 10.7863/jum.2008.27.5.779.Calì G, Timor‐Tritsch IE, Palacios‐Jaraquemada J, Monteaugudo A, Buca D, Forlani F, Familiari A, Scambia G, Acharya G, D'Antonio F. Outcome of Cesarean scar pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 51 (2): 169–175. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.17568.Calì G, Timor-Tritsch IE, Palacios-jaraquemada j, Monteaugudo A, Buca D, et al. Outcome of Cesarean scar pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(2):169-175. DOI: 10.1002/uog.17568.Godin P. A., Bassil S., Donnez J. An ectopic pregnancy developing in a previous caesarian sec-tion scar. Fertility and Sterility. 1997; 67 (2): 398–400. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(97)81930-9Godin PA, Bassil S, Donnez j. An ectopic pregnancy developing in a previous caesarian section scar. Fertil Steril. 1997;67(2):398-400. DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(97)81930-9.El‐Refaey H., El‐Hibri F., Youakim N. Commentary «All women with prior cesarean section should have a 6‐ to 8‐week scan to predict placenta accrete». BJOG. 2014; 140: 171– 182. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12557Comstock CH, Bronsteen RA. The antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta. BJOG. 2014;121(2):171-81; discussion 181-2. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12557.Саркисов С.Э., Романовская О.А., Демидов А.В., Белоусов Д.М. Применение эхографии для диагностики беременности в рубце на матке после кесарева сечения. Ультразвуковая и функциональная диагностика. 2009; 2: 36–42.Sarkisov S.Eh., Demidov A.V., Belousov D.M., Romanovskaya O.A. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy ultrasound diagnostics. Ultrasound and functional diagnostics. 2009;(2):36–42. (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 12962363Чечнева М. А., Панов А.Е., Федоров А.А., Благина Е.И. Возможности ультразвуковой диагностики и ведения беременности при наличии рубца на матке. SonoAce Ultrasound. 2015; 27: 3–10.Chechneva M.A., Panov A.E., Fedorov A.A., Blagina E.I. Vozmozhnosti ul'trazvukovoj diagnostiki i vedenija beremennosti pri nalichii rubca na matke. SonoAce Ultrasound. 2015;(27): 3–10. (In Russ.).D'Antonio F., Palacios-Jaraquemada J., Lim P.S., Forlani F., Lanzone A. et al. Counseling in fetal medicine: evidence-based answers to clinical questions on morbidly adherent placenta. Ultra-sound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 47 (3): 290–301. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.14950.D'Antonio F, Palacios-jaraquemada j, Lim PS, Forlani F, Lanzone A, et al. Counseling in fetal medicine: evidence-based answers to clinical questions on morbidly adherent placenta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):290-301. DOI: 10.1002/uog.14950.Timor-Tritsch I.E., D'Antonio F., Cali G. et al. Early first-trimester transvaginal ultrasound is indicated in pregnancy after previous Cesarean delivery: should it be mandatory? Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 54 (2): 156–163. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.20225.Timor-Tritsch IE, D'Antonio F, Calí G, Palacios-jaraquemada j, Meyer j, Monteagudo A. Early first-trimester transvaginal ultrasound is indicated in pregnancy after previous Cesarean delivery: should it be mandatory? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(2):156-163. DOI: 10.1002/uog.20225.Vial Y., Petignat P., Hohlfeld P. Pregnancy in a cesarean scar. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2000; 16 (6): 592–593. https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00300-2.x.Vial Y, Petignat P, Hohlfeld P. Pregnancy in a cesarean scar. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(6):592-3. DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00300-2.x.Timor-Tritsch I.E., Monteagudo A., Cali G., Palacios-Jaraquemada J.M., Maymon R. et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy and early placenta accreta share common histology. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 43: 383–395. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.13282.Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G, Palacios-jaraquemada jM, Maymon R, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy and early placenta accreta share common histology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43(4):383-95. DOI: 10.1002/uog.13282.Kaelin Agten A., Cali G., Monteagudo A., Oviedo J., Ramos J. et al. The clinical outcome of cesarean scar pregnancies implanted «on the scar» versus «in the niche». Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 216 (5): 510. 1–6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.019.Kaelin Agten A, Cali G, Monteagudo A, Oviedo j, Ramos j, Timor-Tritsch I. The clinical outcome of cesarean scar pregnancies implanted «on the scar» versus «in the niche». Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(5):510.e1-510.e6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.019.Li K., Dai Q. Differential diagnosis of cesarean scar pregnancies and other pregnancies implanted in the lower uterus by ultrasound parameters. Biomed. Res. Int. 2020; 8904507. https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/8904507Li K, Dai Q. Differential Diagnosis of Cesarean Scar Pregnancies and Other Pregnancies Implanted in the Lower Uterus by Ultrasound Parameters. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:8904507. DOI: 10.1155/2020/8904507.Timor-Tritsch I.E., Monteagudo A., Calí G., El Refaey H., Kaelin Agten A. et al. Easy sonographic differential diagnosis between intrauterine pregnancy and cesarean delivery scar pregnancy in the early first trimester. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 215 (2): 225. 1–7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.02.028.Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cali G, El Refaey H, Kaelin Agten A, Arslan AA. Easy sonographic differential diagnosis between intrauterine pregnancy and cesarean delivery scar pregnancy in the early first trimester. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(2):225.e1-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.02.028.Abdallah Y., Naji O., Saso S., PexstersA., Stalder C. et al. Ultrasound assessment of the peri-implantation uterus: a review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2012; 39 (6): 612–619. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.10098.Abdallah Y, Naji O, Saso S, Pexsters A, Stalder C, et al. Ultrasound assessment of the peri-implantation uterus: a review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39(6):612-9. DOI: 10.1002/uog.10098.Jurkovic D., Jauniaux E., Kurjak A., Hustin J., Campbell S. et al. Transvaginal color Doppler assessment of utero-placental circulation in early pregnancy. Obstet. Gynecol. 1991; 77: 365–369.jurkovic D, jauniaux E, Kurjak A, Hustin j, Campbell S, Nicolaides KH. Transvaginal color Doppler assessment of the uteroplacental circulation in early pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77(3):365-9. PMID: 1992400.Calí G., Forlani F., Timor-Tritsch I.E., Palacios-Jaraquemada J., Minneci G. et al. Natural history of Cesarean scar pregnancy on prenatal ultrasound: the crossover sign. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 50: 100–104. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.16216.Cali G, Forlani F, Timor-Tritsch IE, Palacios-jaraquemada j, Minneci G, D'Antonio F. Natural history of Cesarean scar pregnancy on prenatal ultrasound: the crossover sign. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(1):100-104. doi: 10.1002/uog.16216.Calí G., Timor‐Tritsch I.E., Forlani F., Palacios‐Jar Quemada J., Monteagudo A. et al. Value of first‐trimester ultrasound in prediction of third‐trimester sonographic stage of placenta accreta spectrum disorder and surgical outcome. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 55: 450–459. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.21939.Calí G, Timor-Tritsch IE, Forlani F, Palacios-jaraquemada j, Monteagudo A, et al. Value of first-trimester ultrasound in prediction of third-trimester sonographic stage of placenta accreta spectrum disorder and surgical outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;55(4):450-459. DOI: 10.1002/uog.21939.Moschos E., Wells C.E., Twickler D.M. Biometric sonographic findings of abnormally adherent trophoblastic implantations on cesarean delivery scars. J. Ultrasound Med. 2014; 33: 475–481. https://dx.doi.org/10.7863/ultra.33.3.475.Moschos E, wells CE, Twickler DM. Biometric sonographic findings of abnormally adherent trophoblastic implantations on cesarean delivery scars. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(3):475-81. DOI: 10.7863/ultra.33.3.475.Osser O.V., Jokubkiene L., Valentin L. Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2010; 35 (1): 75–83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.7496.Osser OV, jokubkiene L, Valentin L. Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35(1):75-83. DOI: 10.1002/uog.7496.Timor‐Tritsch I.E. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a therapeutic dilemma Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 57 (1); 32-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.23549Timor-Tritsch IE. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a therapeutic dilemma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021;57(1):32-33. DOI: 10.1002/uog.23549.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.