ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are associated with pre-eclampsia. Pre-eclampsia can have systemic manifestations, such as ascites. Lupus peritonitis, a rare condition in patients with SLE, can also cause ascites. CASE PRESENTATION: A 31-year-old woman, primigravida, with SLE had a blood pressure of 170/110 mmHg and proteinuria at 29 weeks of gestation. She was diagnosed with pre-eclampsia. Her blood pressure was stabilized by an antihypertensive drug. At 30 weeks of gestation, a cesarean section was performed for maternal safety because of decreased urine output and massive ascites. Postoperatively, re-accumulation of ascites was observed. On the fourth postoperative day, ascites (approximately 3 L) was discharged from the cesarean section wound. A decrease in serum complement concentrations was observed, and she was diagnosed as having lupus peritonitis. The steroid dose was increased and she recovered well thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Ascites occurs in pre-eclampsia and SLE, but determining which of these conditions causes ascites can be difficult. However, careful observation is necessary because of the differences in treatment of these two conditions.
Subject(s)
Ascites/etiology , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/complications , Peritonitis/complications , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications , Adult , Cesarean Section , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is a potentially fatal condition requiring urgent and appropriate intervention. Uterine artery embolization (UAE) has a high hemostatic capacity for PPH, but it may fail. Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) has been reported as a risk factor associated with the failure of UAE. CASE PRESENTATION: A 37-year-old primigravida with dichorionic diamniotic twins and placenta previa underwent cesarean section. The blood loss during surgery was 4950 mL. Hemostasis was achieved using an intrauterine balloon tamponade device. However, she lost a further 2400 mL of blood 5 h after surgery. We embolized both uterine arteries using gelatin sponges and confirmed hemostasis. She was suffering from DIC and received ample blood transfusions. However, a further 1300 mL of blood was lost 18 h after surgery and we performed repeated UAE, with complete recanalization of the uterine arteries on both sides and re-embolization with gelatin sponges. Her DIC was treated successfully by blood transfusions at this time, and she showed no further bleeding after the repeated UAE. CONCLUSIONS: DIC is a risk factor for the failure of UAE. Repeated UAE may be effective after sufficient improvement of the hematological status in patients with PPH and DIC.
