Vaginal prolapse repair with or without a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and occult stress urinary incontinence: a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We compared pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair with and without midurethral sling (MUS) in women with occult stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: This was a randomized trial conducted by a consortium of 13 teaching hospitals assessing a parallel cohort of continent women with symptomatic stage II or greater POP. Women with occult SUI were randomly assigned to vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Women without occult SUI received POP surgery. Main outcomes were the absence of SUI at the 12-month follow-up based on the Urogenital Distress Inventory and the need for additional treatment for SUI. RESULTS: We evaluated 231 women, of whom 91 randomized as follows: 43 to POP surgery with and 47 without MUS. A greater number of women in the MUS group reported absence of SUI [86 % vs. 48 %; relative risk (RR) 1.79; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.48]. No women in the MUS group received additional treatment for postoperative SUI; six (13 %) in the control group had a secondary MUS. Women with occult SUI reported more urinary symptoms after POP surgery and more often underwent treatment for postoperative SUI than women without occult SUI. CONCLUSIONS: Women with occult SUI had a higher risk of reporting SUI after POP surgery compared with women without occult SUI. Adding a MUS to POP surgery reduced the risk of postoperative SUI and the need for its treatment in women with occult SUI. Of women with occult SUI undergoing POP-only surgery, 13 % needed additional MUS. We found no differences in global impression of improvement and quality of life.

Repurposed drug studies on the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 among healthy adults. DESIGN: Systematic review. ELIGIBILITY: Quantitative experimental and observational intervention studies that evaluated the effectiveness of repurposed drugs for the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCE: PubMed and Embase (1 January 2020-28 September 2022). RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were applied to assess the quality of studies. DATA ANALYSIS: Meta-analyses for each eligible drug were performed if ≥2 similar study designs were available. RESULTS: In all, 65 (25 trials, 40 observational) and 29 publications were eligible for review and meta-analyses, respectively. Most studies pertained to hydroxychloroquine (32), ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (11), statin (8), and ivermectin (8). In trials, hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis reduced laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (risk ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90), I2=48%), a result largely driven by one clinical trial (weight: 60.5%). Such beneficial effects were not observed in observational studies, nor for prognostic clinical outcomes. Ivermectin did not significantly reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR: 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.26), I2=96%) and findings for clinical outcomes were inconsistent. Neither ACEi or ARB were beneficial in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most of the evidence from clinical trials was of moderate quality and of lower quality in observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our analysis are insufficient to support an evidence-based repurposed drug policy for SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis because of inconsistency. In the view of scarce supportive evidence on repurposing drugs for COVID-19, alternative strategies such as immunisation of vulnerable people are warranted to prevent the future waves of infection. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021292797.

MisoREST: Surgical versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of curettage versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a multicenter cohort study alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) between June 2012 until July 2014. 27 Dutch hospitals participated. Women with an incomplete evacuation after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage who declined to participate in the RCT, received treatment of their preference; curettage (n=65) or expectant management (n=132). A successful outcome was defined as an empty uterus on sonography at six weeks or uneventful clinical follow-up. We furthermore assessed complication rate and (re)intervention rate RESULTS: Of the 197 women who declined to participate in the RCT, 65 preferred curettage and 132 expectant management. A successful outcome was observed in 62/65 women (95%) in the surgical group versus 112/132 women (85%) in the expectant group (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.03-1.2), with complication rates of 6.2% versus 2.3%, respectively (RR 2.7, 95% CI 0.6-12). CONCLUSION: In women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment, expectant management is an effective and safe option. This finding could restrain the use of curettage in women that have used misoprostol in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage.

Nifedipine versus placebo in the treatment of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a randomized controlled trial: Assessment of perinatal outcome by use of tocolysis in early labor-APOSTEL IV trial.

OBJECTIVE: Preterm birth is the most common cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Around one third of preterm deliveries starts with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM). The aim of this trial was to study the effect of prolonged tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo in women with PPROM on perinatal outcome and prolongation of pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: The Apostel IV was a nationwide multicenter randomized placebo controlled trial. We included women with PPROM without contractions between 24(+0) and 33(+6) weeks of gestation. Participants were randomly allocated to daily 80mg nifedipine or placebo, until the start of labor, with a maximum of 18 days. The primary outcome measure was a composite of poor neonatal outcome, including perinatal death, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, periventricular leukomalacia>grade 1, intraventricular hemorrhage>grade 2, necrotizing enterocolitis>stage 1 and culture proven sepsis. Secondary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and prolongation of pregnancy. Analysis was by intention to treat. To detect a reduction of poor neonatal outcome from 30% to 10%, 120 women needed to be randomized. TRIAL REGISTRY: NTR 3363. RESULTS: Between October 2012 and December 2014 we randomized 25 women to nifedipine and 25 women to placebo. Due to slow recruitment the study was stopped prematurely. The median gestational age at randomization was 29.9 weeks (IQR 27.7-31.3) in the nifedipine group and 27.0 weeks (IQR 24.7-29.9) in the placebo group. Other baseline characteristics were comparable. The adverse perinatal outcome occurred in 9 neonates (33.3%) in the nifedipine group and 9 neonates (32.1%) in the placebo group (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.49-2.2). Two perinatal deaths occurred, both in the nifedipine group. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia was seen less frequently in the nifedipine group (0% versus 17.9%; p=0.03). Prolongation of pregnancy did not differ between the nifedipine and placebo group (median 11 versus 8 days, HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.58-1.79). CONCLUSION: This randomized trial did not show a beneficial effect of prolonged tocolysis on neonatal outcomes or prolongation of pregnancy in women with PPROM without contractions. However, since results are based on a small sample size, a difference in effectiveness cannot be excluded.