ArticleBMJ case reports2014
Torrential epistaxis in the third trimester: a management conundrum.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epistaxis in Pregnant Women in the Covid-19 Era.Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- Severe epistaxis in pregnancy due to nasal pyogenic granuloma: A case report.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2020Article
- Management of Severe Epistaxis during Pregnancy: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Case reports in obstetrics and gynecology · 2019Article
- The way a nose could affect pregnancy: severe and recurrent epistaxis.The Pan African medical journal · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although epistaxis is common during pregnancy, large volume epistaxis is rare. Many standard epistaxis management options are limited in pregnancy due to absolute or relative contraindications. Ear, nose and throat surgeons need to be aware of what options can be used safely and effectively. We present a case of a 32-year-old woman, 32 weeks pregnant, who was admitted with heavy epistaxis refractive to conservative management. Several potential interventions including bismuth iodoform paraffin paste (BIPP) and Floseal were contraindicated or involved additional risk in pregnancy necessitating unorthodox management. This challenging case highlights suitable alternatives for managing large volume epistaxis during pregnancy, as well as discussing the differential diagnosis and relevant investigations.
Indexed as
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.