Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36319041›Full record

ArticleBMJ case reports2022

Uterine necrosis during pregnancy following exploratory laparotomy.

Anna Hirsch, Rachel Newman, Mariam Naqvi

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Anna HirschObstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA anna.hirsch@cshs.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6740-4374
Rachel NewmanObstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1472-677X
Mariam NaqviObstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uterine necrosis is an infrequent event and is most commonly reported as a complication of interventions for postpartum haemorrhage management. Cases of uterine necrosis in pregnancy are rare. The mainstay of treatment for uterine necrosis is hysterectomy, and the data regarding conservative management are limited. A gravida 3, para 2 presented at 33 weeks gestation with ovarian torsion and underwent an exploratory laparotomy with ovarian cystectomy. The surgery was complicated by excess bleeding, which was controlled with the placement of sutures along the uterine body. She had multiple subsequent presentations for severe abdominal pain without clear aetiology. Four weeks after the initial surgery, she underwent caesarean delivery, at which time uterine necrosis was diagnosed. Her uterus was preserved. She received postoperative intravenous antibiotics and was closely observed. She continued to do well 10 months postpartum. In patients with uterine necrosis during pregnancy who are haemodynamically stable, conservative management may be an option.

Indexed as

LaparotomyPostpartum HemorrhageFemaleHumansNecrosisPregnancySuturesUterusMaterno-fetal medicineObstetrics and gynaecologyPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID36319041
PMCPMC9628654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.