ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: a potential way for diagnosing cesarean scar pregnancy.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a condition in which the gestational sac implants within the scar tissue of a previous cesarean section uterine incision. This potentially life-threatening condition can result in severe, uncontrollable bleeding for the patient. Early and definite diagnosis is crucial. This study aims to investigate the imaging characteristics and the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) on CSP. Methods: This retrospective study included patients suspected of having CSP by transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) between October 2012 and October 2023 at our Hospital. The clinical data, TVUS findings, CEUS images, and intraoperative findings were obtained. Based on surgical and pathological findings, patients were classified into CSP and non-CSP groups. The CSP group was further subdivided into gestational sac-type CSP and mass-type CSP according to TVUS findings. Results: A total of 124 patients for whom we performed both TVUS and CEUS were included for the final analysis, among them, 102 were confirmed as CSP and 22 as non-CSP by surgical and pathological findings. The diagnostic accuracy of TVUS was 83.1%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of CEUS were 100% (95% CI: 0.964-1.000), 95.45% (95% CI: 0.849-0.999), 99.03% (95% CI: 0.969-0.999), 100% (95% CI: 0.855-1.000), and 99.19% (95% CI: 0.969-0.999). On CEUS, the CSP group showed significant differences in the initial site of contrast enhancement and myometrial thickness compared with the non-CSP group (0.15±0.12 cm Conclusions: In patients with high suspicion of CSP, CEUS could help provide better characterization of lesion's vascular features and classification of different CSP subtypes.
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.