ArticleCase reports in obstetrics and gynecology2013
Two Live Births following Robotic-Assisted Abdominal Cerclage in Nonpregnant Women.
Article in Case reports in obstetrics and gynecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancements in robotic surgery: innovations, challenges and future prospects.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- Minimally invasive abdominal cerclage compared to laparotomy: a comparison of surgical and obstetric outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2018Article
- Robotic surgery in gynecology.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2016Review
- Robotic surgery in gynecology.Journal of minimal access surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction. To report the robotic-assisted abdominal cerclage performed in two nonpregnant women and the success of live birth outcomes. Presentation of Cases. A 36-year-old woman with a complaint of recurrent second trimester pregnancy losses and a 35-year-old patient with a complaint of preterm deliveries and cervical insufficiency underwent robotic assisted abdominal cervicoisthmic cerclage placement in nonpregnant period. The two patients had spontaneous pregnancy after the robotic-assisted abdominal cerclage and delivered healthy infants. Discussion. The limitations of traditional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage have been accomplished with robotic surgery advantages especially intuitive movements and increased range of motion. There are only a few studies in the literature including robotic assisted abdominal cerclage in nonpregnant women, and only five successful live birth outcomes were reported. In this paper, we reported the sixth and seventh cases of achieved live pregnancy after robotic assisted abdominal cerclage in the literature. Conclusion. Robotic assisted abdominal cerclage is a good alternative surgical method with successful pregnancy outcomes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.