ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis in Pregnancy: A Case-Control Study of Management and Maternal Safety.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 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.
- Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis in Pregnancy: A Case-Control Study of Management and Maternal Safety.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Role of Oncoviruses in Cancer Progression and Emerging Phytochemical-Based Therapies from Medicinal Plants.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate safety and clinical course in pregnant idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS) patients and to identify variables associated with operative dilation requirement during pregnancy.
backgroundPregnancy in patients with iSGS presents management challenges that may impact maternal and fetal health. Clinical studies and shared experiences are limited.
methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted evaluating pregnant iSGS patients and an age-matched never pregnant iSGS control group. Pregnant patients were subcategorized based on whether they required surgery during pregnancy. The analyzed variables included demographics, inter-dilation intervals, time to first recurrence, intraoperative stenosis percent, and fetal and maternal safety.
resultsThirty-three patients were included, 23 in the pregnancy group, and 10 in the control group. Thirteen patients required operative intervention during pregnancy. The mean age at iSGS diagnosis was 31.1 years. All pregnancies resulted in live births. No surgical or anesthesia-related complications were reported. Antinuclear antibody (ANA) positivity was more frequent in the surgical-intervention group compared to the nonintervention group (5/10 vs. 0, p < 0.05). The overall inter-dilation interval was longer in the pregnancy group compared to the control group (median: 70.9 vs. 39.6 weeks, p < 0.05) Average stenosis percentages in surgical dilations during and prior to pregnancy were comparable (60.4 ± 21.6 vs. 55.2 ± 27.8).
conclusionSurgical management of iSGS patients is safe during pregnancy. Greater than 50% patients experienced exacerbation during pregnancy that required operative intervention. The only notable patient-specific factor associated with dilation during pregnancy was ANA positivity. There were no pregnancy-specific factors associated with the need for intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.