ReviewBMC surgery2022
In correspondence to "Spontaneous common bile duct perforation in full term pregnancy: a rare case report and review of literature".
Review in BMC surgery, 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, 1 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe correspondence letter aims to correct the historical perspective on common bile duct perforations (CBD) during pregnancy and complete the number of published cases.
findingsInstead of declared article by Piotrowski et al., from 1990, and according to available English language literature, the first two descriptions of maternal spontaneous CBD perforation in pregnancy were by JT Hogan Jr in 1957 and then Maurice Abitbol in 1958. Additional six cases of this condition were found, which is an increase of 50% of published cases. PURPOSE: The purpose of this correspondence letter is to correct the historical perspective on CBD perforation during pregnancy. Also, only all published cases in English language literature can shed new light on incidence, diagnosis, treatment, and maternal and fetal prognosis from maternal CBD perforation in pregnancy.
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.