ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021
Non-haemorrhagic uterine rupture at 28 weeks of pregnancy following previous caesarean section: a case report.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subtle presentation of complete uterine rupture in a scarred uterus: a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Determinants of cesarean mode of childbirth among Rwandan women of childbearing age: Evidence from the 2019-2020 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey (RDHS).Public health challenges · 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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is need to put forward more symptoms and signs that could suggest a diagnosis of uterine rupture so that clinicians' suspicion is increased; there is also need to put forward uncommon intraoperative findings in patients with uterine rupture to correlate with the signs and symptoms of patients. CASE PRESENTATION: A 33 year old Gravida 5 Para 4 + 0 with 2 previous caesarean section scars at 28 weeks of amenorrhoea, presented to hospital complaining of lower abdominal pain for 11 h. She had no vaginal bleeding or vaginal discharge or pain on passing urine. On examination she had no pallor, pulse rate was 84 bpm, blood pressure was 110/80 mm of mercury (mmHg), fundal height was 27 cm (cm), fetal heart rate was regular at 150 beats per minute (bpm) and her cervix had a parous os. She was diagnosed with preterm labour and given dexamethasone intramuscularly, then an obstetric ultrasound scan was done and it revealed severe oligohydramnios. Decision do deliver her by emergency caesarean section was made and intraoperative findings were of a uterine rupture along the uterine scar with a fetal arm protruding through and vernix caseosa in the peritoneal cavity, without active uterine bleeding. The patient recovered well postoperatively.
conclusionsThere is need to suspect uterine rupture in pregnant women with previous caesarean section scars if they present with abdominal pain and are found to have severe oligohydramnios despite having no history of any vaginal discharge, even when the fetal heart rate is normal and they are haemodynamically stable and without vaginal bleeding and remote from term.
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.