Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36303847›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

Therapeutic effect of laparoscopic salpingotomy vs. salpingectomy on patients with ectopic pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lin Wenjing, Li Haibo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lin WenjingDepartment of Obstetrics, Baoji Central Hospital, Baoji, China.
Li HaiboDepartment of Obstetrics, Baoji Central Hospital, Baoji, China.
Baoji City Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aim: Laparoscopic treatment of ectopic pregnancy mainly includes laparoscopic salpingotomy and salpingectomy. We aimed to assess the therapeutic effect of laparoscopic salpingotomy and salpingectomy on patients with tubal pregnancy. Methods: From January 2000 through June 2022, the Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Chinese Biomedicine Database were searched for studies that compared the therapeutic effect of laparoscopic salpingotomy vs. salpingectomy in the treatment of tubal pregnancy. Results: Twenty-four randomized clinical trials (RCTs) studies were incorporated into this analysis. No statistical differences were found between the two groups in terms of operation duration and postoperative hospitalize length, but the volume of intraoperative blood loss in patients with laparoscopic salpingotomy was less than that in salpingectomy. Importantly, the natural intrauterine pregnancy rate after laparoscopic salpingotomy was significantly higher than those who underwent salpingectomy. In addition, laparoscopic salpingotomy can better protect the ovarian reserve function and endocrine function and provide favorable conditions for the second pregnancy. Conclusion: Patients with ectopic tubal pregnancy should give priority to laparoscopic salpingotomy for embryo extraction.

Indexed as

meta-analysisRCT (randomised controlled trial)salpingectomysalpingotomytubal pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID36303847
PMCPMC9592917
OpenAlexW4304175440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.