ArticleCureus2024
Prophylactic Cervical Cerclage in Cases Following Cervical Conization at a Japanese Perinatal Center.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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, 0 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to re-examine the effect of cerclage on the possible factors associated with preterm delivery in women who had cervical conization. This was a retrospective cohort study comparing the obstetric outcomes of women with or without prophylactic cervical cerclage in pregnancy following a prior conization and managed at our institute between 2004 and 2023. In this study, there were 75% of pregnant women with a history of cervical conization. In 13 women of these (17%), prophylactic cervical cerclage was performed at 12-17 weeks' gestation. The incidence of preterm delivery was 15 (9/62) and 31% (4/13, p = 0.38) in cases with and without cervical cerclage, respectively. The prevalence of histological chorioamnionitis (CAM) in cases of preterm delivery following cervical cerclage was 100%. Prophylactic cervical cerclage in the cases following conization did not contribute to the prevention of preterm delivery associated with the development of CAM.
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.