ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021
Local Methotrexate Injection Followed by Dilation and Curettage for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Prospective Non-randomized Study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. 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.
- Clinical effect of uterine artery embolization combined with curettage in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Transcatheter Arterial Embolization (TAE) of Uterine Artery with Gelatin Sponge for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Current State of the Art Review.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Single-Session No-Touch Hysteroscopic Mechanical Resection for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Novel Primary Treatment Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Temporary uterine artery blocking and uterine artery embolization in treating cesarean scar pregnancy.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic Fluorescence Guided Detection of Uterine Niche-The Next Step in Surgical Diagnosis and Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the clinical effects and outcomes of local intra-gestational sac methotrexate injection followed by dilation and curettage for treatment of cesarean scar pregnancies (CSP).
methodThis prospective non-randomized study was conducted on patients diagnosed with CSP between 2018 and 2020 at the Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the treatments, i.e., local intra-gestational sac methotrexate injection followed by dilation and curettage (group A), and uterine artery embolization in combination with dilation and curettage (group B). The choices of treatment reflect the patients' decision after they thoroughly understood the benefits and risks of the two therapies. Clinical data were then collected and compared between these two alternatives.
resultsSeventy-seven patients with CSP were enrolled in the study. Of this total, 41 vs. 36 were respectively categorized into group A and group B. Similar success rates were observed between these two groups (92.7 vs. 97.2%; RR = 27.362, 95% CI: 0.496-1.51E3,
conclusionsLocal intra-gestational sac methotrexate injection followed by dilation and curettage is an effective and safe treatment for CSP that also drastically reduces the risks of complications. Further multiple center randomized trials with large series are warranted to confirm these findings.
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.