ReviewBMC women's health2024
Minimally invasive treatment of uterine necrosis with favorable outcomes: an uncommon case presentation and literature review.
Review in BMC women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Postpartum Necrotizing Myometritis.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Non-Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI)-Related Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID).Microorganisms · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUterine necrosis is a rare condition and is considered a life-threatening complication. However, cases of uterine necrosis were rarely reported, particularly those caused by infection. In terms of treatment, no minimally invasive treatment for uterine necrosis has been reported, and total hysterectomy is mostly considered as the treatment option.
objectiveThe article specifically focuses on minimally invasive treatments and provides a summary of recent cases of uterine necrosis. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 28-year-old patient gravid 1, para 0 underwent a cesarean section after unsuccessful induction due to fetal death. She presented with recurrent fever and vaginal discharge. The blood inflammation markers were elevated, and a CT scan revealed irregular lumps with low signal intensity in the uterine cavity. The gynecological examination revealed the presence of gray and white soft tissue, approximately 5 cm in length, exuding from the cervix. The secretions were found to contain Fusobacterium necrophorum, Escherichia coli, and Proteus upon culturing. Given the patient's sepsis and uterine necrosis caused by infection, laparoscopic exploration uncovered white pus and necrotic tissue openings in the anterior wall of the uterus. The necrotic tissue was removed during the operation, and the uterus was repaired. Postoperative pathological findings revealed complete degeneration and necrosis of fusiform cell-like tissue. Severe uterine necrosis caused by a multi-drug resistant bacterial infection was considered after the operation. She was treated with antibiotics for three weeks and was discharged after the infection was brought under control. The patient expressed satisfaction with the treatment plan, which preserved her uterus, maintained reproductive function, and minimized the extent of surgery.
conclusionBased on the literature review of uterine necrosis, we found that it presents a potential risk of death, emphasizing the importance of managing the progression of the condition. Most treatment options involve a total hysterectomy. A partial hysterectomy reduces the extent of the operation, preserves fertility function, and can also yield positive outcomes in the treatment of uterine necrosis, serving as a complement to the overall treatment of this condition.
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.