ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2022
Hysteroscopic resection vs dilation and evacuation for treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Scar Ectopic Pregnancy as an Uncommon Site of Ectopic Pregnancy: A Case Report and Literature Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a type of ectopic pregnancy where the fertilised egg is implanted in the muscle or fibrous tissue of the scar after a previous caesarean section. Management options for women who opted for termination of CSP include sharp curettage, dilation and evacuation (D&E), excision of trophoblastic tissues, local or systemic administration of methotrexate, bilateral hypogastric artery ligation, and selective uterine artery embolisation with curettage and/or methotrexate administration. Recently hysteroscopic resection has also been proposed as an alternative option. Objective: To compare the surgical outcome of hysteroscopic resection with dilation and evacuation (D&E) for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). Methods: Parallel-group, non-blinded, randomised clinical trial conducted at a single centre in Italy. Eligible women are those with singleton gestations at less than 9 weeks of gestation, and with thickness of myometrial layer ≥1 mm at the level of the ectopic. Inclusion criteria are women with CSP with positive embryonic/fetal heart activity who opted for termination of pregnancy. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to receive either hysteroscopic resection (i.e. intervention group) or D&E (i.e. control group). In both groups, 50 mg/m2 (based on DuBois formula for body surface area) of methotrexate (MTX) will be injected intramuscularly at the time of randomisation (day 1) and another dose at day 3. A third dose of MTX is planned in case of persistence of fetal heart activity on day 5. Participants will receive either D&E or hysteroscopic resection from 3 to 7 days after the last dose of MTX. A sample size of 54 women is planned. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is the success rate of the treatment protocol, defined as no requirement for further treatment until complete resolution of the CSP as demonstrated by negative beta hCG levels and absence of residual gestational material on ultrasound examination.. Study hypothesis: Hysteroscopic surgery is superior to D&E for the treatment of CSP. What is new?: The results of the trial will provide information on the best treatment for CSP.
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.