Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38711904›Full record

ArticleAME case reports2024

Imaging diagnosis of rudimentary horn pregnancy: a case report.

Jiaqi Ji, Li Tan, Ke Lv

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in AME case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Jiaqi JiDepartment of Ultrasound, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Li TanDepartment of Ultrasound, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ke LvDepartment of Ultrasound, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Rudimentary horn pregnancy (RHP) is a special type of ectopic pregnancy and its pathophysiological basis is an abnormal fusion of the bilateral accessory mesonephric duct during the embryonic period. If sonographers lack experience to this disease, it is easily to be misdiagnosed in the early period, which often leads to rupture of the pregnant horn and life-threatening bleeding. Therefore, a high index of vigilance is required. Case Description: We present a case of a 27-year-old female who went to the department of emergency due to menopause, pelvic pain and elevated human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) (above 200,000 IU/L). Sonographic examination showed uterus only had the right horn and endometrium was thickened about 1.7 cm without gestational sac (GS) in the uterine cavity. Besides, a 3.5×3.0 cm GS was found between the left ovary and corpus uteri. RHP was suspected by sonographer, and the patient underwent laparoscopy. Obstetricians and gynecologists removed the rudimentary horn and the left fallopian tube. The patient made a good recovery and was soon discharged home after surgery. Conclusions: This article analyzed one case and summarized ultrasonic characteristics of RHP which may help to improve the early diagnosis of RHP. If necessary, other imaging such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be combined to make a clear diagnosis and treatment as soon as possible.

Indexed as

Case reportrudimentary horn pregnancy (RHP)ultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID38711904
PMCPMC11070992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.