ArticleHealth science reports2026
Surgical Treatment Options and the Subtypes of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Did Not Affect the Probability of a Subsequent Pregnancy: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimal Treatment Selection for Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: Using a Predictive Score of Intraoperative Blood Loss: A Prospective Cohort Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Surgical Treatment Options and the Subtypes of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Did Not Affect the Probability of a Subsequent Pregnancy: A Prospective Cohort Study.Health science reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is rare but poses a potentially life-threatening complication. There is currently insufficient evidence in the literature regarding the impact of CSP treatment on future fertility due to limited clinical studies on a large scale. Here, we investigated the future reproductive outcomes of women with CSP. Methods: From December 2019 to July 2023, women diagnosed with CSP at the Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Fudan University, Shanghai, China, were followed up by telephone calls. Data on future fertility and outcomes were collected. Results: Among 302 women, excluding three who did not answer the question, 234 (77.5%) did not express their intention to conceive in future, while only 65 (22%) expressed an intention to conceive again. Among these 65 women intending to conceive, 14 (21.5%) achieved pregnancy. In contrast, among women who did not intend to conceive, 31 (15.4%) achieved pregnancy. After excluding women within 12 months of treatment, the analysis showed no statistical difference in successful conception between women who intended to conceive again and those who did not ( Conclusion: Our study found that 22% of women with CSP intended to conceive, and 29% of our study cohort had a subsequent pregnancy. There was no association between treatment options or CSP subtype and successful conception. Additionally, the incidence of complications in subsequent pregnancies was comparable to that reported in the literature for women without a history of CSP. Our findings suggest that surgical treatments for CSP may not negatively affect future fertility.
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.