Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21655978›Full record

SynthesisInternational urogynecology journal2011

Obturator artery revisited.

José R Sañudo, Rosa Mirapeix, Marc Rodriguez-Niedenführ, Eva Maranillo, Ian G Parkin, Teresa Vázquez

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International urogynecology journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. A new concept and classification of corona mortis and its clinical significance.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2016
    Article
  16. Article
  17. The surgical neurovascular anatomy relating to partial and complete sacral and sacroiliac resections: a cadaveric, anatomic study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2015
    Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

José R SañudoHuman Anatomy and Embryology I Department, School of Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
Rosa Mirapeix
Marc Rodriguez-Niedenführ
Eva Maranillo
Ian G Parkin
Teresa Vázquez

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisThe aim of this work is to analyse the variability of the obturator artery (oa), unify previous criteria and propose a simple classification for clinical use.

methodsA sample of 119 adult human embalmed cadavers was used. Origin and course of the oa in relation with the external iliac artery, internal iliac artery and inferior epigastric artery were studied. Chi-squared and t test were used for statistical comparison, and p < 0.05 was considered significant.

resultsBased on the number of roots of origin, three different situations were observed. The oa shows a single origin (96.55%). The oa presents a double origin (3.02%), or the oa arises from three roots (0.43%). The first situation was subclassified into six types according to the oa origin. Equal vascular pattern in both hemi-pelvises was observed in 58.93%.

conclusionsAlmost 31% of oa passes over the superior pubic ramus implying an increased risk during some procedures.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overArteriesCadaverEpigastric ArteriesFemaleHumansIliac ArteryMaleMiddle AgedPelvis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.