The effect of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy on ovarian reserve

References

• Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Santos R, et al. The diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of cesarean scar pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(44):e1–e13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seow KM, Huang LW, Lin YH, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: issues in management. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23(3):247–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litwicka K, Greco E. Caesarean scar pregnancy: a review of management options. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25(6):456–461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, et al. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):331 e1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Neill SM, Khashan AS, Kenny LC, et al. Caesarean section and subsequent ectopic pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2013 May;120(6):671–680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin L, Chen W, Zhou Y. Expert opinion of diagnosis and treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2016;51(8):568–572.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xiao J, Zhang S, Wang F, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: noninvasive and effective treatment with high-intensity focused ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(4):e3511–e3517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiao B, Zhang Z, Li Y. Uterine artery embolization versus methotrexate for cesarean scar pregnancy in a Chinese population: a meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(7):1040–1048.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birch Petersen K, Hoffmann E, Rifbjerg Larsen C, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(4):958–967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenn TL, Bembry J, Findley AD, et al. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: current management strategies. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2018;73(5):293–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim CW, Shim HS, Jang H, et al. The effects of uterine artery embolization on ovarian reserve. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;206:172–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLucas B, Voorhees WD 3rd, Elliott S. Fertility after uterine artery embolization: a review. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2016;25(1):1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El Shamy T, Amer SAK, Mohamed AA, et al. The impact of uterine artery embolization on ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(1):16–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Zhang W, Orsi F, et al. Ultrasound-guided high intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of gynaecological diseases: a review of safety and efficacy. Int J Hyperthermia. 2015;31(3):280–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu X, Deng X, Wan Y, et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy. Medicine. 2015;94(18):e854.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen L, Xiao S, Zhu X, et al. Analysis of the reproductive outcome of patients with cesarean scar pregnancy treated by high-intensity focused ultrasound and uterine artery embolization: a retrospective cohort study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019;26(5):883–890.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hehenkamp WJ, Looman CW, Themmen AP, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone levels in the spontaneous menstrual cycle do not show substantial fluctuation. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91(10):4057–4063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun Q-L, Wu X-H, Luo L, et al. Characteristics of women with mixed mass formation after evacuation following uterine artery chemoembolization for cesarean scar pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018;297(4):1059–1066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun QL, Luo L, Gao CY, et al. Scoring system for the prediction of the successful treatment modality in women with cesarean scar pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;146(3):289–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silver RM. Delivery after previous cesarean: long-term maternal outcomes. Semin Perinatol. 2010;34(4):258–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhuang Y, Huang L. Uterine artery embolization compared with methotrexate for the management of pregnancy implanted within a cesarean scar. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(152):e1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Shen L, Tan A, Zhu H, et al. Bilateral uterine artery chemoembolization with methotrexate for cesarean scar pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(5):386.e1–386.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hehenkamp WJ, Volkers NA, Broekmans FJ, et al. Loss of ovarian reserve after uterine artery embolization: a randomized comparison with hysterectomy. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(7):1996–2005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsen K, Hrobjartsson A, Korsholm M, et al. Fertility after uterine artery embolization of fibroids: a systematic review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018;297(1):13–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tempest N, Hapangama D. Should we be putting our scalpels down? Is HIFU the answer to fertility-sparing fibroid treatment? BJOG. 2018;125(3):366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang C, Jacobson H, Ngobese ZE, et al. Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided high intensity focused ultrasound ablation of symptomatic uterine fibroids in black women: a preliminary study. BJOG. 2017;124(Suppl 3):12–17.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huang L, Du Y, Zhao C. High-intensity focused ultrasound combined with dilatation and curettage for cesarean scar pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43(1):98–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu X, Deng X, Xiao S, et al. A comparison of high-intensity focused ultrasound and uterine artery embolisation for the management of caesarean scar pregnancy. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32(2):144–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang C, Zhang Y, He J, et al. Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies in patients following treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy with high intensity focused ultrasound followed by ultrasound-guided dilation and curettage. Int J Hyperthermia. 2019;36(1):926–931.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, Te Velde ER, et al. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(12):3065–3071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, Scheffer GJ, et al. Serum antimullerian hormone levels best reflect the reproductive decline with age in normal women with proven fertility: a longitudinal study. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(4):979–987.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JS, Hong GY, Lee KH, et al. Changes in anti-müllerian hormone levels as a biomarker for ovarian reserve after ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment of adenomyosis and uterine fibroid. BJOG. 2017;124(Suppl 3):18–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qu K, Mao S, Li J, et al. The impact of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound for uterine fibroids on ovarian reserve. Int J Hyperthermia. 2020;37(1):399–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouyang Z, Liu P, Yu Y, et al. Role of ovarian artery-to-uterine artery anastomoses in uterine artery embolization: initial anatomic and radiologic studies. Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34(8):737–741.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar