ArticleJournal of medical case reports2019
Delayed diagnosis of a cesarean scar pregnancy: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the clinical efficacy of three surgical methods for cesarean scar pregnancy.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Introduction and utility of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta for cases with a potential high risk of postpartum hemorrhage: A single tertiary care center experience of two cases.Fukushima journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Late-diagnosed cesarean scar pregnancy resulting in unexpected placenta accreta spectrum necessitating hysterectomy.Fukushima journal of medical science · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCesarean scar pregnancy is rare but may be related to early uterine rupture and may result in massive hemorrhage. Nowadays, most cesarean scar pregnancies are diagnosed early and can be managed properly. However, diagnoses of cesarean scar pregnancies that develop in the obstetrical area are sometimes delayed. CASE PRESENTATION: A 28-year-old Asian woman visited our institution because of suspected cesarean scar pregnancy. Ultrasonography and computed tomography confirmed a cesarean scar pregnancy with a live fetus with a crown-rump length of 4.83 cm, corresponding to 11 weeks 6 days of gestation. Initially, we injected 50 mg of methotrexate in the amniotic sac under transabdominal ultrasonographic guidance. However, fetal cardiac activity was still observed 2 days later. We decided to perform open laparotomy because of the possibility of massive bleeding. The gestational sac was removed, as well as most of the trophoblastic tissues that were adherent and invading the wall of the lower uterine segment. She was discharged in good condition 5 days after the operation.
conclusionsDespite the popular use of ultrasonography in prenatal care, diagnosis of cesarean scar pregnancy is still delayed. Surgical treatment with local methotrexate injection could be an option for the management of advanced cesarean scar 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.