ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2025
Ovarian remnant syndrome: an unsuspected diagnosis.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persistently elevated estradiol after bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in recurrent low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: a case report.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2026Article
- Pelvic Congestion Syndrome: The Gynecological Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ovarian remnant syndrome (ORS) is a rare condition defined by the presence of residual tissue of ovarian origin, histologically confirmed in a woman with a previous salpingo-oophorectomy, usually as a result of difficult surgery in the presence of adhesions. Objectives: To evaluate the existing literature on ORS. Methods: A narrative review was performed. A search for relevant articles was carried out in PubMed for the period from January 2014 to July 2024. Three original cases of ORS are also reported. Main Outcome Measures: All available literature on the subject was analysed and articles relevant to the topic of the review were included. Additional articles were reviewed to provide an overview of the issue. Results: A total of 10 different cases of ORS found in the literature were analysed, together with 3 original cases. Conclusions: The presence of distorted anatomy and extensive adhesions may lead to an increased risk of residual ovarian tissue. Residual ovarian tissue may sometimes evolve into a malignant lesion. When difficult oophorectomy is suspected, the surgeon must proceed with caution to complete oophorectomy. Strict follow-up is essential to detect ORS. What is New?: This is the first narrative review including cases described in the literature and three new original cases. Our work provides a comprehensive and global view of this condition and may help in clinical practice to reduce the risk of ORS through appropriate surgical planning and possibly early diagnosis of the syndrome.
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.