ArticleThe journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research2022
Mechanical dilatation of the stenosed cervix under local anesthesia: A prospective case series.
Article in The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research, 2022. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimCervical stenosis is traditionally managed by mechanical dilatation under general anesthesia (GA). We aimed to assess the safety, effectiveness, and patient acceptability of dilatation in the outpatient setting under local anesthesia (LA).
methodsData were collected prospectively from all patients attending the outpatient department with cervical stenosis from March 20, 2015 to September 23, 2020. Mechanical dilatation of the cervix was performed using Hegar dilators under LA. Subsequent colposcopic assessment, cytology, histology, and management were recorded.
resultsOne hundred forty-nine cases were referred for cervical dilatation, 63 (43%) of which had complete stenosis. One hundred eighteen (79%) patients had previously undergone cervical procedures. Successful dilatation under LA was achieved in 119 (83%) patients; 5 (3%) declined (requesting GA), 6 (4%) did not tolerate speculum examination, and 19 (13%) had unsuccessful procedures. The median Hegar size used was 8 mm. Dilatation under LA was acceptable in 93% attempted procedures. Thirteen episodes of restenosis were recorded with no major adverse events. Younger age (p = 0.045) and severe (compared to complete) stenosis (p < 0.0001) were associated with procedure success, with improved results over time (p = 0.003). Successful dilatation permitted cervical assessment; eight patients required cervical excisions, two underwent hysterectomies, with one confirmed case of adenocarcinoma.
conclusionRigid cervical dilatation in the outpatient setting provides effective, instantaneous treatment for women who have failed cytological or colposcopic assessment. For the vast majority of women, the procedure was well tolerated and preferred to using GA. However, given that 1 in 10 women experienced restenosis, patients should be counseled about the possibility of requiring further management.
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.