ArticleMedicine2017
Evaluating a magnetic resonance imaging of the third-trimester abdominal pregnancy: What the radiologist needs to know.
Article in Medicine, 2017. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced primary abdominal pregnancy with a live birth: a case report.Case reports in perinatal medicine · 2026Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging after laparotomy of fetal evacuation in advanced abdominal pregnancy.Radiology case reports · 2025Article
- [Abdominal ectopic pregnancy: case report and review of the literature].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024Review
- Advanced abdominal pregnancy complicated by pelvic inflammatory disease: A compelling case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA 33-week abdominal pregnancy is an extremely rare type of ectopic pregnancy that is potentially life-threatening for the mother and fetus. Reports of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the third-trimester abdominal pregnancy are very few. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 24-year-old woman (gravida 2, para 1, living 0) at 33 weeks' gestation presented to local hospital complaining of vaginal bleeding for 2 months and lower abdominal pain for 2 days. Then, the woman was transferred to our hospital for suspected abdominal pregnancy, which was confirmed at our hospital on ultrasonography and further evaluated in detail on MRI. DIAGNOSES: The woman was diagnosed as having abdominal pregnancy.
interventionsThe woman was managed surgically, the unviable fetus was removed, and the placenta was left in situ. Then, the woman was managed with fluids, blood transfusion, antibiotics, and systemic methotrexate after surgery. OUTCOMES: At 42 days postoperatively, the affected woman was discharged in a good condition.
conclusionsBy using MRI, we can accurately diagnose an abdominal pregnancy. MRI provides more details than ultrasonography, and explains the possible mechanism of abdominal pregnancy. We advocate using MRI to help surgical planning and improve outcome in cases of abdominal pregnancy.
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.