ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Clinical effect of uterine artery embolization combined with curettage in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
Objective: To observe the clinical effect of uterine artery embolization combined with curettage in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy(CSP). Methodology: This was a retrospective study. The subjects of study were 100 patients with CSP from Baoding No.1 Central Hospital between December 2020 and December 2024. Included patients were randomly divided into two groups, with 50 cases in each group. Patients in the study group received uterine artery embolization combined with curettage, while those in the control group were given routine ultrasound-guided curettage. Compared intraoperative bleeding volume, length of stay in the hospital, β-hcG recovery time, and vaginal bleeding time; pre- and post-treatment levels of stress indicators such as adrenocorticotropic hormone(ACTH), cortisol(Cor), and aldosterone(ALD); pre- and post-treatment scores of anxiety and depression, and the incidence of complications between groups. Results: The clinical response rate of the study group and the control group was 100% and 90%, respectively(p=0.02). The length of stay in the hospital, β-hcG recovery time and vaginal bleeding time were significantly shorter, while the intraoperative bleeding volume was significantly lower in the study group than those of the control group(all p=0.00). Post-treatment ACTH, Cor and ALD levels in the study group were lower than those in the control group(all p=0.00). Moreover, post-treatment SAS and SDS scores of the study group were significantly reduced compared to those of the control group(both p=0.00). Conclusion: Uterine artery embolization combined with curettage is a safe and effective therapeutic approach for the treatment of CSP.
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.