ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2022
Selection of Laparoscopy or Laparotomy for Treating Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Retrospective Study.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Systematic evaluation of the efficacy of treatments for cesarean scar pregnancy.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Article
- Clinical Application of a New Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Classification and Evaluation System and a Risk Scoring System.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Efficacy, Safety and Outcomes of the Laparoscopic Management of Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy as a Single Therapeutic Approach: A Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) can have catastrophic consequences, but a standardized diagnosis and treatment for CSP are lacking. At least 10 different treatments are currently available, further confusing treatment selection. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of using laparotomy or laparoscopy to treat CSP. Methods: We reviewed data from 935 patients with suspected CSP from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2018. A total of 278 patients were included in the study, of whom 121 were treated with laparoscopy and 157 were treated with laparotomy. We compared and analyzed the characteristics of laparoscopic and open surgeries for treating CSP cases and the advantages and disadvantages of different vascular pretreatments. Results: Intraoperative bleeding, the transfusion rate, total days of hospitalization and postoperative hospital length of stay were lower with laparoscopy than laparotomy ( Conclusion: This study revealed that laparoscopic surgery is superior to laparotomic surgery for treating CSP. Patients in both groups benefited from temporary arterial occlusion. Thus, temporary arterial occlusion with laparoscopic surgery may be the best treatment for CSP.
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.