ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2020
Hysteroscopic treatment of cesarean scar defect.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2020. 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.
- Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of Coexisting Endometrial Lesions in Patients with Cesarean Scar Defect Undergoing Hysteroscopic Resection for Prolonged Menstruation.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Comparison of long-term clinical effect and re-pregnant outcomes between hysteroscopic resection and laparoscopic defect repair in patients with non-severe cesarean scar defect: a retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Risk factors and outcomes associated with type of uterine rupture.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effect of hysteroscopic surgery on the outcomes of obstetrics and gynecology among patients with cesarean section diverticulum.
methodsNinety-nine infertile patients with cesarean section diverticulum received hysteroscopic treatment and were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were followed for 1 year.
resultsThe study included ninety-nine symptomatic patients with cesarean section diverticulum. After surgery, the menstrual periods of patients were improved from 11.15 ± 4.44 to 7.69 ± 2.85 days. Forty-seven (47/99) women became pregnant after surgery. The number of patients who became pregnant with an anteflexion uterus after hysteroscopic surgery is 32 (32/57), and the number of women who became pregnant with a retroflexion uterus is 15 (15/42).
conclusionHysteroscopic surgery could improve the PCSD-associated prolonged menstrual bleeding, and satisfactory obstetrical outcomes could be achieved by the surgery treatment in women with cesarean defect.
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.