ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Bladder hydrodissection vs. Traditional hysterectomy in placenta accreta: a single-center controlled trial pilot study in Shiraz, Iran.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and Factors Associated With Urologic Injury in Patients With Placenta Accreta Spectrum Undergoing Cesarean Hysterectomy Over a 10-Year Retrospective Cohort at a Tertiary Referral Center in Shiraz, Iran.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Changing trends in perinatal outcomes of placenta accreta spectrum: a comparative analysis of cesarean hysterectomy cases in Southern Iran over a decade.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Cervical length and maternal and neonatal outcomes in placenta accreta spectrum: a single-center cohort study from Shiraz, Iran (2020-2024).BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlacenta accreta is a serious condition during pregnancy often leading to cesarean hysterectomy. This study aimed to investigate a novel hysterectomy method and compare its primary outcomes and adverse effects to the traditional approach.
methodsThis single-center controlled trial was conducted at Namazi Hospital in Shiraz. Pregnant women with placenta accreta were assigned to one of two groups: using the new method of hydrodissection of the bladder or the traditional method of cesarean hysterectomy based on their consent. Key results were investigated and compared in both groups, including operation time, blood loss, urological complications, use of blood products, length of admission in the intensive care unit (ICU), and the need for a multidisciplinary team during surgery. Data were analyzed using independent sample t-tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, and generalized linear models.
resultsSixty-nine patients were enrolled in the study, with 23 in the bladder hydrodissection group and 46 in the traditional method group. The bladder hydrodissection group experienced significantly lower bleeding volumes and reduced need for blood products (p < 0.001). The duration of operation was also considerably shorter in the bladder hydrodissection group (p < 0.001). ICU admission duration was not different between groups (p-value 0.15). One patient in the case group and 10 in the control group need reoperation (p-value 0.04).
conclusionBladder hydrodissection could be the preferred technique for performing hysterectomy in cases of placenta accreta, as it is linked to fewer complications such as decreased bleeding, reduced need for additional surgery, less urologic complications, and shorter duration of the procedure.
trial registrationThe trial registration number is IRCT20160130026260N3, registered at http://irct.ir , on 2022-03-08. ( https://irct.behdasht.gov.ir/trial/62290 ).
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.