ArticleCureus2025
Cesarean Section Scar Endometriosis: A Case Report From Sudan.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cesarean scar endometriosis is a rare form of endometriosis characterized by the presence of functional endometrial tissue within a surgical scar. Diagnosing this condition is challenging, as it is frequently misdiagnosed as granulomas, hernias, abscesses, hematomas, or neoplasms. The classic triad of symptoms includes a positive surgical history, cyclical pain, and a mass at the surgical scar. The presented case highlights the pivotal role of imaging modalities such as MRI, along with histopathological confirmation, in establishing a definitive diagnosis. Surgical excision with clear margins is the mainstay of treatment and remains superior to medical therapy in terms of long-term outcomes. Diagnosis relies on a high index of clinical suspicion. Clinical evaluation, along with ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), aids in diagnosis. Surgical intervention is the definitive treatment, providing specimens for histopathological confirmation. We report the case of a 27-year-old woman with a history of one cesarean delivery who presented with a progressively enlarging, painful mass over her lower abdominal scar. The pain was cyclical and associated with menstruation. MRI revealed a heterogeneous mass not reaching rectus sheath. Surgical excision of the lesion was performed, and histopathological examination confirmed the diagnosis of endometriosis. The patient recovered uneventfully, with complete resolution of symptoms and no recurrence at six-month follow-up. This case highlights the importance of considering scar endometriosis in women with a history of cesarean section who present with cyclical pain and a mass at the scar site. Early recognition and surgical excision are essential for symptom relief and to prevent recurrence. Increased clinical awareness is crucial to avoid misdiagnosis and unnecessary delays in treatment.
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.