ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Does uterine gauze packing increase the risk of puerperal morbidity in the management of postpartum hemorrhage during caesarean section: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Effectiveness of Uterine Gauze Packing for Refractory Postpartum Haemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- Intrauterine double-balloon tamponade vs gauze packing in the management of placenta previa: A multicentre randomized controlled trial.Medicine · 2020Trial
- Nomogram for predicting the risk of nosocomial infections among obstetric inpatients: a large-scale retrospective study in China.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Observational
- Global research priorities for intrauterine suction and sponge tools for postpartum haemorrhage management in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi approach.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Is it worth to insert uterine pack instead of Bakri balloon to control postpartum hemorrhage after vaginal delivery in hypertensive patients?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Observational
- Safety and efficacy of intrauterine balloon tamponade vs uterine gauze packing in managing postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.AJOG global reports · 2023Article
- Prophylactic application of Bakri balloon tamponade versus uterine gauze packing during cesarean section in patients with placenta previa.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the outcomes especially the puerperal morbidity of uterine gauze packing (UGP) with those of uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) in the management of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) during caesarean section (c-section).
methodsIt was considered success as no requirement for either a further therapy or hysterectomy for PPH. The postpartum infection risk was pragmatically measured as puerperal morbidity.
resultsThe identified PPH subjects were subdivided into two groups for comparison, in which UGP or UBT was used as second-line therapy for women undergoing c-sections between January 2010 and September 2014. Of the 318 c-section subjects initially treated by basic managements for expected PPH, 99 cases underwent UGP and 66 UBT as the second-line therapies to stop persistent bleeding. The success rates of the UGP and UBT groups were 90.91 and 87.88%, respectively. Only one patient in UBT group resorted to hysterectomy. The respective rates of puerperal morbidity were 10.10 and 13.64%, with risk ratio of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.72). There were no significant differences between the two groups even after the adjustment for potential confounding factors.
conclusionUGP appears to be effective in treating PPH during c-section without an observed increase in the risk of potential postpartum infection when compared with UBT. UGP could be recommended as routine for patients who are not responding to conventional basic therapies in addressing PPH, along with the provision of appropriate training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26550320PMC4613005W2195679619What 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.