Patient perspectives and preferences on cerclage and preterm birth: a focus group study.

AIM: This qualitative focus group study aims to asses cerclage-related symptoms, the impact of a cerclage on daily functioning and patient perspectives of their healthcare experience. This study extends beyond the current focus on surgical and obstetric outcomes of a cerclage, thereby contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges faced by individuals in the context of extreme preterm birth and fetal loss and the impact of a cerclage on multiple facets in life. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands or via the website of a Dutch patient organization for (extreme) preterm birth. Eligible participants were ≥ 18 years old with a previous vaginal and/or abdominal cerclage with a subsequent delivery at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation with neonatal survival. Two focus group discussions (FGD) were performed. A predefined format was used, which was identical for both the vaginal and abdominal cerclage group. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF-DH) was used to provide structure. Outcomes were a broad range of participants reported perspectives on physical, emotional, and social-related quality of life. RESULTS: In the Vaginal Cerclage Group (VCG) and Abdominal Cerclage Group (ACG), respectively, 11 and 8 participants were included. Fear for a subsequent pregnancy loss was the most limiting factor to perform daily activities during pregnancy in all participants with a cerclage. Fear to conceive again because of prior second-trimester fetal loss was experienced by 27% in the VCG and 13% in the ACG. The majority of participants experienced a reduction in anxiety after placement of their cerclage (VCG = 64%, ACG = 75%). Decreased mobility/bedrest (VCG = 100%, ACG = 75%) and blood loss (VCG = 55%, ACG = 13%) were frequently mentioned complaints during pregnancy with cerclage. Other aspects mentioned in both groups were social isolation, the lack of societal participation, and the perceived need to quit work and sports. All participants in the abdominal cerclage group reported a lack of comprehensible and unambiguous information about obstetric management and expectations during pregnancy in secondary care hospitals. Clear communication between secondary and tertiary care hospitals about obstetric management following an abdominal cerclage, for example, about the need for cervical length measurements by ultrasound, the need for bedrest or advice concerning sexual activity was missing (63%). Psychologic support was desired in half of all participants, but was not offered to them. CONCLUSIONS: The fear of a subsequent pregnancy loss was reported as the most limiting factor in daily life by all participants. Cerclage placement resulted in the reduction of anxiety. Participants mentioned a significant impact of bedrest and activity restriction during pregnancy with cerclage on social participation and daily activities. Unfortunately, no high level evidence is available on this matter. Patients might even benefit from appropriate levels of physical activity throughout their pregnancy to promote their overall well-being. More evidence is needed to determine the optimal level of physical activity. There is a need for clear and unambiguous patient information about obstetric management.

Favorable surgical and obstetrical outcomes in pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage: a large multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical incompetence is an important cause of extremely preterm delivery. Without specialized treatment, cervical incompetence has a 30% chance of recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy. Recently, the first randomized controlled trial showed significant superiority of abdominal cerclage compared with both high and low vaginal cerclage in preventing preterm delivery at <32 weeks of gestation and fetal loss in patients with a previous failed vaginal cerclage. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess surgical and obstetrical outcomes in patients with pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage placement. Furthermore, it also aimed to perform subgroup analysis based on the indication for cerclage placement in order to identify patients who benefit the most from an abdominal cerclage. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter cohort study with consecutive inclusion of all eligible patients from 1997 onward in the Dutch cohort (104 patients) and from 2007 onward in the Boston cohort (169 patients) was conducted. Eligible patients had at least 1 second- or third-trimester fetal loss due to cervical incompetence and/or a short or absent cervix after cervical surgery. This includes loop electrosurgical excision procedure, conization, or trachelectomy. Patients were divided into the following subgroups based on the indication for cerclage placement: (1) previous failed vaginal cerclage, (2) previous cervical surgery, and (3) other indications. The third group consisted of patients with a history of multiple second- or early third-trimester fetal losses due to cervical incompetence (without a failed vaginal cerclage) and/or multiple dilation and curettage procedures. The primary outcome measure was delivery at ≥34 weeks of gestation with neonatal survival at hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included surgical and obstetrical outcomes, such as pregnancy rates after preconceptional surgery, obstetrical complications, and fetal survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 273 patients were included (250 in the preconceptional and 23 in the postconceptional cohort). Surgical outcomes of 273 patients were favorable, with 6 minor complications (2.2%). In the postconceptional cohort, 1 patient (0.4%) had hemorrhage of 650 mL, resulting in conversion to laparotomy. After preconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage (n=250), the pregnancy rate was 74.1% (n=137) with a minimal follow-up of 12 months. Delivery at ³34 weeks of gestation occurred in 90.5% of all ongoing pregnancies. Four patients (3.3%) had a second-trimester fetal loss. The indication for cerclage in all 4 patients was a previous failed vaginal cerclage. The other subgroups showed fetal survival rates of 100% in ongoing pregnancies, with a total fetal survival rate of 96%. After postconceptional placement, 94.1% of all patients with an ongoing pregnancy delivered at ³34 weeks of gestation, with a total fetal survival rate of 100%. Thus, second-trimester fetal losses did not occur in this group. CONCLUSION: Pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage is a safe procedure with favorable obstetrical outcomes in patients with increased risk of cervical incompetence. All subgroups showed high fetal survival rates. Second-trimester fetal loss only occurred in the group of patients with a cerclage placed for the indication of previous failed vaginal cerclage, but was nevertheless rare even in this group.

Distribution of ABO and Rh blood groups among pregnant women attending the obstetrics and gynecology clinic at the Jordan University Hospital.

The ABO and D antigen status of red blood cells (Rh blood grouping systems) are important hematological classification systems that categorize blood groups according to the presence or absence of certain erythrocytic antigens. These antigens affect the outcomes of blood transfusions as well as various hematological and immunological diseases. We aimed to study ABO and Rh blood group distribution among pregnant women visiting the antenatal care clinic at Jordan University Hospital (JUH) in Amman, Jordan. A retrospective analysis of all pregnant women delivering at the Jordan University Hospital (JUH) between October 1, 2016, and September 31, 2021. ABO and D antigen status of red blood cells (Rh blood groups) were summarized and documented. 20,136 pregnant women data were analyzed, the O blood group was the most prevalent (n = 7840, 38.9%), followed by A (n = 7506, 37.3%). For the D antigen status, the Rh-positive (Rh+) category was the most common (n = 18,159, 90.2%). For the (O) blood group; O-Rh+ type was the most prevalent (90.1%). Determining the blood group type accurately helps eliminate the critical consequences of both ABO and Rh incompatibility and offers clinicians an opportunity to take timely prophylactic measures. In our analyses O and Rh+ blood groups were the most prevalent.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of disease severity and risk of recurrence in young versus elderly patients with left-sided acute diverticulitis.

Young patients are thought to have a more severe disease course and a higher rate of recurrent diverticulitis. However, these understandings are mainly based on studies with important limitations. This review aimed to clarify the true natural history of acute diverticulitis in young patients compared to elderly patients. PubMed and MEDLINE were searched for studies reporting outcomes on disease severity or recurrences in young and elderly patients with a computed tomography-proven diagnosis of acute diverticulitis. Twenty-seven studies were included. The proportion of complicated diverticulitis at presentation (21 studies) was not different for young patients (age cut-off 40-50 years) compared to elderly patients [risk ratio (RR) 1.19; 95% confidence interval 0.94-1.50]. The need for emergency surgery (11 studies) or percutaneous abscess drainage (two studies) yielded comparable results for both groups with a RR of 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.70-1.24) and 1.65 (95% confidence interval 0.60-4.57), respectively. Crude data on recurrent diverticulitis rates (12 studies) demonstrated a significantly higher RR of 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.20-1.80) for young patients. Notably, no association between age and recurrent diverticulitis was found in the studies that used survival analyses, taking length of follow-up per age group into account. In conclusion, young patients do not have a more severe course of acute diverticulitis. Published data on the risk of recurrent diverticulitis in young patients are conflicting, but those with the most robust design do not demonstrate an increased risk. Therefore, young patients should not be treated more aggressively nor have a lower threshold for elective surgery just because of their age.