Trial reportEuropean journal of medical research2025
Comparison of Maylard and Cherney incisions' outcomes in hysterectomy surgery for benign indications: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in European journal of medical research, 2025. 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.
- Definition, analysis, reporting, and interpretation of perioperative bleeding in randomized controlled trials: a methodological systematic review.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesChoosing the incision for surgery depends on a variety of factors, including the surgeon's preference, patient preference, surgical indications, the patient's systemic issues, previous surgical scars, and other considerations. This trial aimed to evaluate and compare the surgical outcomes of two techniques-Maylard and Cherney incisions-in benign hysterectomy procedures for women. MATERIALS AND
methodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted in Al-Zahra Women's Tertiary Referral University Hospital. A total of 60 patients undergoing benign hysterectomy were randomly allocated to two groups, with one group undergoing surgery with a Maylard incision and the other with a Cherney incision. Surgeries in both groups were performed by a gynecologist oncologist who was a member of the university faculty, accompanied by an Obstetrics and Gynecology Resident.
resultsThere were no significant differences in hemoglobin levels or clinical or obstetric characteristics before surgery between the two study groups (p > 0.05). The mean time from skin incision to entering the abdominal cavity was 14.23 min for Maylard and 13.6 min for Cherney (p = 0.091). The average blood loss was 506.6 mL in the Maylard group and 429.3 mL in the Cherney group, which was statistically significant (p = 0.031). Postoperative hemoglobin levels were 11.68 g/dL in the Maylard group and 12.07 g/dL in the Cherney group (p = 0.133). Pain scores were higher in the Cherney group than in the Maylard group (p = 0.041). There were no surgical complications after 1 and 3 months in the study groups.
conclusionsNo complications were observed in any of the patients following the surgery. The Mylard incision showed a higher level of bleeding in comparison with the Cherney incision, which was linked to more noticeable pain. Nevertheless, both incisions are deemed as effective options for gynecological surgeries, offering superb visibility to the pelvis.
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.