ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2021
Diagnostic criteria for retained products of conception-A scoping review.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Operative hysteroscopy vs vacuum aspiration for treatment of retained products of conception: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Is a history of cesarean section a predictive factor for the failure of medical management in spontaneous abortion?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Post protocol residual thickness as a negative predictor for pharmacological treatment in early pregnancy loss.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of an Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Prediction of the Need for Surgical Evacuation in Patients with Incomplete Abortion.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Ultrasound Assessment of Retained Products of Conception (RPOC): Insights from the Current Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cross-Sectional Imaging of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: Diagnostic Pearls and Pitfalls on CT and MR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Predicting outcomes of expectant and medical management in early pregnancy miscarriage using machine learning to develop and validate multivariable clinical prediction models.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Sonographic evaluation of retained products of conception within 48 h following delivery: a retrospective cohort study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Multimodal approach in distinguishing and managing uterine arteriovenous malformation: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2025Article
- Development of a prognostic scoring system for predicting hospitalization duration in postpartum endometritis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Retained Products of Conception (RPOC): Diagnosis, Complication & Management.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2023Review
- Clinical significance of retained products of conception in placenta previa: a retrospective analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Diagnostic criteria for retained products of conception-A scoping review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNumerous studies have been performed assessing optimal treatment regimens for evacuating (retained) products of conception from the uterus, but standardized criteria for diagnosing retained products of conception (RPOC) are still lacking. We aim to provide an overview of diagnostic criteria in current literature, used to diagnose RPOC after induced first-trimester abortion or early pregnancy loss. MATERIAL AND
methodsPubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched systematically up until March 2020 for English articles reporting on induced abortion or early pregnancy loss. Articles not specifying diagnostic criteria used to assess completeness of treatment were excluded, as were conference abstracts, expert opinions, reviews, and case reports. Four elements of diagnostic criteria were described: diagnostic tools, parameters used within these tools, applied cut-off values, and timing of follow up. Additionally, a meta-analysis was performed assessing diagnostic qualities of the most often applied diagnostic tool and parameter.
resultsThe search strategy yielded 1233 unique articles, of which 248 were included, with a total of 339 517 participants. In the 79 included randomized controlled trials, six diagnostic tools to assess RPOC were identified, combined in 14 ways, with 55 different cut-off values. In 169 observational studies, seven diagnostic tools were identified, used in 28 combinations, applying 89 different cut-off values. Transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of endometrial thickness with a cut-off value of at least 15 mm indicating RPOC, was used most frequently. In the timing of follow-up there was great variation, with 55 and 107 different combinations in randomized controlled trials and observational studies, respectively. Assessment of treatment success was scheduled most often around 2 weeks after treatment. Diagnostic qualities of endometrial thickness of 15 mm or more was not adequately assessed.
conclusionsThere is wide variation in the way RPOC are assessed, and the criteria used to define RPOC following induced abortion and early pregnancy loss; ultrasonographic measurement of endometrial thickness, with a cut-off of 15 mm or more 2 weeks after primary treatment is the most widely used diagnostic approach. A meta-analysis on diagnostic accuracy of endometrial thickness of 15 mm or more did not lead to solid results. These findings can be a first step to develop a workable standard of establishing RPOC after induced abortion or early pregnancy loss.
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.