Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40921702›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of international medical research2025

Accessory cavitated uterine malformation in a perimenopausal woman: Case report and literature review.

Yuan Zhang, Hanxue Lv, Congjie Lin, Hua Liu

Abstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of international medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yuan ZhangAffiliated Hospital of Shandong Second Medical University, China.ORCID 0009-0008-9123-8853
Hanxue LvAffiliated Hospital of Shandong Second Medical University, China.
Congjie LinAffiliated Hospital of Shandong Second Medical University, China.
Hua LiuAffiliated Hospital of Shandong Second Medical University, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accessory cavitated uterine malformation is a rare congenital anomaly of Müllerian duct development that typically affects younger women of reproductive age. The most common symptoms include chronic cyclic pelvic pain and severe dysmenorrhea, although diagnosis is frequently delayed owing to its rarity, multiple differential diagnoses, and low patient awareness. This report describes the case of a perimenopausal woman with accessory cavitated uterine malformation. The patient exhibited a palpable mass in the right lower abdomen without notable chronic pelvic pain or dysmenorrhea. It was initially misdiagnosed as an adnexal cyst in the right region based on ultrasound imaging, and laparoscopic exploration revealed a mass in the uterine corpus, leading to a revised diagnosis of accessory cavitated uterine malformation, which was confirmed through intraoperative findings and histopathological examination. The postoperative outcomes were favorable. This case underscores the diagnostic challenges of accessory cavitated uterine malformation, given the limited research on its pathogenesis and the absence of distinctive diagnostic markers. Imaging and histopathology are essential for an accurate diagnosis. Surgical intervention, especially laparoscopy, remains the preferred treatment, with excision typically resulting in a favorable postoperative prognosis.

Indexed as

PerimenopauseUrogenital AbnormalitiesUterusDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMiddle AgedPelvic PainUltrasonographyAccessory cavitated uterine malformationcase reportlaparoscopic surgerypathological examinationultrasound misdiagnosis

Identifiers

PMID40921702
PMCPMC12417653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.