ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2022
Temporary Internal Iliac Artery Blockage versus Uterine Artery Embolization in Patients After Laparoscopic Pregnancy Tissue Removal Due to Cesarean Scar Pregnancy.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of the Efficacy of Four Different Surgical Modalities in the Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Surgical treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy based on the three-category system: a retrospective analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- A combination of laparoscopy and bilateral uterine artery occlusion for the treatment of type II cesarean scar pregnancy: a retrospective analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and safety of prophylactic abdominal aortic balloon occlusion for patients with type III caesarean scar pregnancy: a prospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Emergency internal iliac artery temporary occlusion after massive hemorrhage during surgery of cesarean scar pregnancy: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the clinical value of laparoscopic temporary internal iliac artery blockage (TIIAB) compared with uterine artery embolization (UAE) in type III cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).
methodsA total of 76 patients with type III CSP admitted to the Department of Gynecology the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between September 2017 and June 2019 were selected for this retrospective study. Thirty-six of them in the study group received TIIAB, and the rest in control group received UAE. Laparoscopic pregnancy tissue was removed from all patients, and the uterine defects were repaired. The absence of remnants was then confirmed using ultrasonography. Follow-ups were performed in the two groups for six months, and the factors of intraoperative blood loss, operation and menelipsis time, 24-h human chorionic gonadotropin decline rate, postoperative complications, hospitalization days, hospitalization costs, peri-operative hormone levels, and ovarian function indicators were compared between the two groups and within each group.
resultsThere were statistically significant differences in the hospitalization cost, menelipsis time, and postoperative complication incidence between the two groups (p < 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between ovarian function at one month and three months after surgery (p < 0.05) as well as among the follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and estradiol levels at one, three, and six months after surgery in the control group (p < 0.05).
conclusionCompared with uterine artery embolization, laparoscopic TIIAB has the advantages of a low hospitalization cost, lower postoperative complication rate, and shorter menelipsis time. Moreover, it avoids ovarian function damage. It is a safe method worthy of clinical popularization.
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.