ReviewBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020
Ovarian ependymoma presenting in pregnancy: a case report and literature review.
Review in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOvarian ependymoma is a rare malignancy. Because of the extreme rarity, certain features of the neoplasm, including its clinical behaviour and optimal therapy, are incompletely characterized. CASE PRESENTATION: A 32-year-old pregnant woman at term presented with a left ovarian neoplasm that occurred in the early stage of pregnancy. She underwent left adnexectomy during the caesarean section, and the neoplasm was histologically and immunohistochemically identified to be ovarian ependymoma. Immunohistochemical staining with oestrogen receptors and progesterone receptors showed strong positive staining. According to reports in the literature, the pathological type of ovarian ependymoma in our patient was the extra-axial type. Interestingly, the foetus was also found to have bilateral ependymal cysts during pregnancy. The patient received no further surgical treatment or adjuvant therapy. She and her 14-month-old baby both have no evidence of disease at present. The follow-up of both mother and child is still continuing.
conclusionsThe case presented here illustrates high levels of oestrogen during pregnancy may stimulate viable malignant ependymal cells to proliferate. Hence, young women with extra-axial-type ependymomas may not be suitable for fertility preservation. Moreover, hormone-based therapies can be a potentially effective treatment for women with extra-axial ependymomas.
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.