ArticleCureus2024
Abnormal Placentation After Caesarean Section: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- The Rising Global Cesarean Section Rates and Their Impact on Maternal and Child Health: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Caesarean section (CS) is a lifesaving operation; it can have many complications in subsequent pregnancies. Since the uterine wall and cavity are not normal after CS, the implantation and subsequent trophoblastic invasion and placenta formation may be affected. This study was carried out to find out implantation and placental problems encountered in subsequent pregnancies. The spectrum includes placenta accreta, increta, and percreta and is characterized microscopically by a complete or partial absence of decidua and placental adherence to or invasion of the myometrium. The study was performed to find out the complications of CS in subsequent pregnancies and take measures to detect them early and take appropriate action. Materials and methods This retrospective study was carried out at Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College and Research Centre Pimpri, Dr DY Patil Vidyapeeth, a large tertiary care centre. Many complications like placenta previa, adherent placenta, ectopic pregnancy, obstetrical hysterectomy, etc, the ones directly related to implantation and placentation, were recorded and compared with the literature. Results and observations The study was over a period of three years. During this period, there were 10,296 antenatal cases registered; of all the registered cases, 2,544 were cases of post-caesarean pregnancy. There were three cases of tubal ectopic pregnancy, two were diagnosed as the patients complained of amenorrhoea, spotting, and pain abdomen, confirmed on sonography and one was picked up on a routine first-trimester scan. There were two cases of scar ectopic pregnancy. Both the cases were diagnosed as threatened abortion initially and ultrasound confirmed the diagnosis; both were managed medically. Five cases of placenta previa were encountered. There were three cases of morbidly adherent placenta, and two cases underwent obstetrical hysterectomy. Conclusion All surgical procedures have become safe, but they all have some complications. Many complications in the next pregnancy after caesarean are life-threatening and dangerous. These complications should be detected early to prevent any catastrophic event.
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.