ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Pulsating electromagnetic fields for perineal lacerations and surgical wounds healing in the postpartum: a pilot study.
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.
- Therapeutic Magnetic Resonance (TMR) in Regenerative Medicine: In Vitro Study to Support Future Clinical Applications.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of our study was to assess the possible benefits of Therapeutic Magnetic Resonance (TMR) in the treatment of spontaneous perineal lacerations and episiotomies in the postpartum.
methodsWe performed a prospective, non-pharmacologic, non-profit, monocentric interventional study on women who had a spontaneous laceration and/or an episiotomy at delivery. The TMR device treatment was accepted by 52 women, while 120 women underwent standard care. Patients were visited 1 day postpartum, before starting the treatment; then a follow-up visit was performed at 3 weeks, 5 weeks, and 3 months after delivery. The main endpoint was the time required for complete healing of the laceration and/or the episiotomy. Secondary endpoints were the prevalence of dehiscence, infections, urinary discomfort, urinary leakage, and the quality of restoration of sexual function.
resultsIn the treatment group the REEDA score was significantly better both at 3- and 5-weeks postpartum follow-up. At 3 weeks and 5 weeks postpartum, we observed a significantly better outcome in the treatment group for all subjective complaints and perineal complications associated with lacerations and episiotomies. The percentage of patients who scored above the cutoff for sexual dysfunction was significantly better in the treatment group (83.3%) than in the control group (31.8%) (p < 0.001).
conclusionsWith this pilot study, we introduced low dose Pulsating Electromagnetic Fields (PEMFs) as a novel conservative and not pharmacological approach to reduce complications of perineal lesions. Our results demonstrated to significantly improve perineal wound healing and to ameliorate the sexual function in the postpartum.
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.