ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2025
Misdiagnosis analysis of uterine scar pregnancy after cesarean section.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Misdiagnosed uterine scar pregnancy after cesarean section can lead to serious consequences such as uterine rupture and hemorrhagic shock. The present study aimed to analyze the causes and treatment outcomes of misdiagnosed uterine scar pregnancy after cesarean section. A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of seven patients with cesarean scar pregnancy from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the 940th Hospital of the Joint Logistics Support Force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (Gansu, China) in order to analyze the causes of misdiagnosis and explore effective treatment methods. All seven cases were misdiagnosed as intrauterine pregnancy, wherein three were threatened with miscarriage of early pregnancy and four with embryonic arrest. In total, three patients experienced bleeding reaching volumes of 800-1,400 ml (cases 1, 4 and 6). After active bilateral uterine artery embolization (cases 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6), a combination of mifepristone and methotrexate was administered, and the patients' bleeding stopped after embolization treatment. These observations suggest that the use of medications or interventional embolization (cases 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6) followed by ultrasound-guided curettage can yield positive benefits and allow for full patient recovery.
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.