Trauma in pregnancy: An analysis of the adverse perinatal outcomes and the injury severity score.

BACKGROUND: Trauma during pregnancy is one of the most important causes of non-obstetric maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity. The aim of our study is to evaluate the adverse perinatal outcomes that may occur according to the type and severity of the trauma. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, pregnant traumatized women aged 18-50 years and referred for consultation to the Prof. Dr. Cemil Tascioglu City Hospital's emergency services of the departments of gynecology and obstetrics, between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022, were evaluated. Demographic characteristics, trauma findings, Injury Severity Scoring (ISS), and obstet-ric outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1825 trauma patients, including 900 pregnants were referred to our emergency gynecology clinic for consulta-tion. One hundred and fifty three pregnant patients, whose birth information we reached, were selected as the study group. The mean age of the patients was 25.56±5.99 years and the mean gestational week at the time of trauma was 21.59±9.89 weeks, the patients had fallen (67.97%), had been exposed to violence (30.07%), and had a traffic accient (1.96%). The patient's delivery and hospitalization status on the day of trauma, fracture and ISS ≥9 were statistically significantly at a higher rate in the 3rd trimester. Rates of hospitaliza-tion and 3rd trimester traumas were found to be significantly higher in the ISS ≥9 group. (P=0.0001, P=0.028, respectively). CONCLUSION: Compared to the general population, the rates of preterm premature rupture of membranes-premature rupture of membranes, fetal death, fetal distress, cesarean delivery, placental abruption, and preterm delivery increased in traumatized pregnant women. Patients with low ISS scores should also be followed closely during pregnancy in terms of perinatal complications, as well as the severe trauma group.

Open abdomen technique used in complications of major gynecological oncology surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the open abdomen technique (laparostomy) used in complications of major gynecological oncology surgery. METHODS: We analyzed retrospectively the surgical database of all patients who had undergone major open surgery by the same gynecologic oncologist over a 5-year period. All patients who had had open abdomen procedure were identified; demographic data and indications of primary surgery, temporary abdominal closure procedure details, fascia closure and morbidity, mortality rates were evaluated. Intraabdominal infection and intraoperative massive hemorrhage were the major indications for all open abdomen cases. Mannheim Peritonitis Index was used perioperatively to determine open abdomen decision in intraabdominal infections. Vacuum Assisted Abdominal Closure system and Bogota Bag were used for temporary abdominal closure techniques. RESULTS: Out of the total 560 patients who had undergone major oncological surgery, 19 patients (3.3%) had open abdomen procedure due to surgical complications. Eleven patients had intraabdominal infection, six patients had hemodynamic instability due to peri and postoperative hemorrhage, two patients had gross fecal contamination during posterior pelvic exenteration surgery. The fascia was closed totally in 15 (78%), partially in 3 (15%) and could not be closed in 1 patient who had died secondary to multiorgan failure. Total morbidity and mortality rates were 26% (5/19) (two intrabdominal abscess, one pulmonary embolism, one skin necrosis, one enteroatmospheric fistula) and 5.2% (1/19) respectively. CONCLUSION: Open abdomen is a life-saving procedure when applied with correct indications and timing. Gynecological oncologic surgeries are candidates to serious complications and gynecologic oncologists dealing with such surgery should be as experienced as general surgeons in this regard.

Relationship between extreme values of first trimester maternal pregnancy associated plasma Protein-A, free-ß-human chorionic gonadotropin, nuchal translucency and adverse pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to investigate the relationship between extreme values of first trimester screening markers and adverse obstetric outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study was conducted by examining the prenatal and postnatal perinatal records of 786 singleton gestations between the ages of 18-40, who applied to Prof. Dr. Cemil Tasçioglu City Hospital outpatient clinics for first-trimester screening for aneuploidy, between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019. RESULTS: The presence of small for gestational age (SGA) was found to be statistically significant for the <5 percentile (<0.37) pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A) group (p = 0.016). For <5 percentile ß-hCG group, the presence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), premature rupture of membrane (PROM) and preterm premature rupture of membrane (PPROM) was determined as a statistically significant risk (p = 0.015, p = 0.005, p = 0.02 respectively) In the univariate test, fetal death rate was found to be high for ≥90 percentile at nuchal translucency (NT), but the presence of fetal death was found to be statistically insignificant in logistic regression analysis. (p: 0.057). CONCLUSION: First trimester screening test can be used in predicting pregnancy complications. In this study we found that serum levels of PAPP-A are associated with developing SGA, while GDM, PROM and PPROM are more common in low serum free ß-hCG.

The effect of parity on obstetric and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies at the age of 40 and above: a retrospective study.

AIM: To examine the characteristics of pregnancies at a very advanced maternal age and the effect of parity on adverse obstetric outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of women who gave birth at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital between January 2012 and December 2019. Overall, 22 448 of women were younger than 40 and 593 were aged 40 and older. Women aged 40 and older were divided into the primiparous (52 or 8.77%) and multiparous group (541 or 91.23%). RESULTS: Significantly more women aged 40 and older had a cesarean section. The most common indications for a secondary cesarean delivery in both age groups were a previous cesarean procedure or uterine operation. The most frequent indication for primary cesarean section in both groups was fetal distress. Cesarean section rates due to non-progressive labor, fetal distress, and preeclampsia were significantly more frequent in primiparous women compared with multiparous women aged 40 and older. In primiparous women, fetal birth weight was lower and preeclampsia/gestational hypertension frequency were higher. CONCLUSION: Since primiparity was a risk factor for lower fetal birth weight and preeclampsia/gestational hypertension in the age group of 40 years and above, more attention should be paid to the follow-up and treatment of these patients.

Comparison of nine morphological scoring systems to detect ovarian malignancy.

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION: The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the diagnostic performances of nine gray-scale sonographic prediction models to detect ovarian malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data of 322 women presenting with an adnexal mass were obtained and used in nine scoring systems. For each model a ROC curve demonstrating the capacity of the model to diagnose malignancy was constructed for all cases and for the subgroups of premenopause and postmenopause. The performance of each model was expressed as area under the ROC curve, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve, sensitivity, and specificity of these models in the present study varied between 0.737 and 0.929, 70.7% and 87.9%, 60.2% and 80.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study has revealed the usefulness of morphological scoring systems to correctly discriminate between benign and malignant pelvic masses.

Comparison of risk of malignancy index (RMI), CA125, CA 19-9, ultrasound score, and menopausal status in borderline ovarian tumor.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic values of risk of malignancy index (RMI IV), ultrasound score, menopausal status, and serum CA125 and CA19-9 level in patients with borderline ovarian tumor (BOT). METHODS: Fifty women having borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) and 5O individuals with benign adnexal mass were enrolled in this retrospective study. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values and diagnostic accuracy of preoperative serum levels of the CA125 and CA19-9, ultrasound findings and menopausal status, and RMI IV were calculated for prediction of discrimination between BOTs and benign adnexal masses and the results were compared. RESULTS: The RMI IV was the best method for discrimination between BOTs and benign adnexal masses and was more accurate than the other parameters. When Receiver Operator Characteristic area under the curves for menopausal status was analyzed, serum CA 125 and CA19-9 level, ultrasound score, RMI IV(CA125), and RMI IV(CA19-9) were, 0.580, 0.625, 0.548, 0.694, 0.734 and 0.711, respectively. The best RMI IV cut-off was found to be 200 for discrimination of benign and BOT lesions. In the RMI formulation, replacing CA125 with CA19-9 didn't affect RMI IV sensitivity and specificity for discrimination. CONCLUSION: Compared to ultrasound, menopausal status, CA-125, CA19-9, the RMI IV was found to be the best predictive method for differentiation of BOTs from benign adnexal masses. RMI IV cut-off value of 200 is suitable for differentiation of benign and BOT's.

Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the detection of malignant ovarian masses.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of four risk of malignancy indices (RMI) to detect malignant ovarian tumors. METHODS: This is a prospective study of 100 women admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Gulhane Military Medicine Academy for surgical exploration of pelvic masses. To diagnose malignant ovarian tumors, the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values and diagnostic accuracy of four RMIs (RMI 1, RMI 2, RMI 3, and RMI 4) were obtained. RESULTS: In our study we found that there is no statistically significant difference in the performance of four different RMIs in discriminating malignancy. We think that malignancy risk indices is more reliable than the menopausal status, serum CA-125 levels, ultrasound features and tumor size separately in detecting malignancy. CONCLUSION: We concluded that any of the four malignancy risk indices described can be used for selection of cases for optimal therapy. These methods are simple techniques that can be used even in less-specialized gynecology clinics to facilitate the selection of cases for referral to an oncological unit.