ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
3Dimensional sonography for the diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with eccentric pregnancy implantation: a novel approach.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- T-shaped dysmorphic uterus: discrepancies between current 3D-ultrasound diagnostic criteria.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe eccentric implantation of pregnancies in the upper lateral aspect of the uterine cavity is poorly defined clinically. The aim of the current study was to investigate whether differentiating between uterine anomalies that can lead to cavitary distortion has implications for the management of these pregnancies.
methodsEight cases of first-trimester eccentric pregnancy implantation within the endometrial cavity (study group) were retrospectively identified. For each woman in the study group, 10 women identified as having a first-trimester concentric pregnancy implantation during the first-trimester US examination were retrieved from our database (control group). After delivery or pregnancy demise, the presence of uterine anomalies was assessed by a 3D-US examination in all patients.
resultsIn the study group patients, an increased incidence of uterine anomalies (50.0% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.007) was found, compared to the controls. In the study group, the eccentric location persisted in half of the pregnancies (n = 4; 50%), whereas the other half migrated to a more centric location within the endometrial cavity (n = 4; 50%). The follow-up examination showed that all the early pregnancy demises occurred in cases where the pregnancy persisted at the eccentric location. Uterine malformations were also detected in all these cases.
conclusionThe data point to a significantly higher incidence of uterine anomalies in patients diagnosed with eccentric pregnancy implantation within the endometrial cavity. These results advocate for the value of differentiating between eccentric pregnancies in non-anomalous versus anomalous uteri.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39008085What 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.