Serious complications and recurrences after pelvic organ prolapse surgery for 2309 women in the VIGI-MESH registry.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of serious complications and reoperations for recurrence after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and compare the three most common types of repair. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using a registry. SETTING: Nineteen French surgical centres. POPULATION: A total of 2309 women participated between 2017 and 2019. METHODS: A multivariate analysis including an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was used to obtain three comparable groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Serious complications and subsequent reoperations for POP recurrence. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 17.6 months. Surgeries were native tissue vaginal repairs (n = 504), transvaginal mesh placements (n = 692) and laparoscopic sacropexies with mesh (n = 1113). Serious complications occurred among 52 women (2.3%), and reoperation for POP recurrence was required for 32 women (1.4%). At 1 year the cumulative weighted incidence of serious complications was 1.8% for native tissue vaginal repair, 3.9% for transvaginal mesh and 2.2% for sacropexy, and the rates for reoperation for recurrence of POP were 1.5, 0.7 and 1.1%, respectively. Compared with native tissue vaginal repair, the risk of serious complications was higher in the transvaginal mesh group (weighted hazard ratio, wHR 3.84, 95% CI 2.43-6.08) and the sacropexy group (wHR 2.48, 95% CI 1.45-4.23), whereas the risk of reoperation for prolapse recurrence was lower in both the transvaginal mesh (wHR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13-0.39) and sacropexy (wHR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18-0.47) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that native tissue vaginal repairs have the lowest risk of serious complications but the highest risk of reoperation for recurrence. These results are useful for informing women and for shared decision making. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Laparoscopic sacropexy had fewer serious complications than transvaginal mesh and fewer reoperations for recurrence than vaginal repair.

[National survey about the practice of episiotomy within French National College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (CNGOF)]. / Pratiques de l'épisiotomie: enquête auprès des membres du Collège National des Gynécologues Obstétriciens Français.

OBJECTIVE: The main endpoint was to perform a survey about the practices of episiotomy into a CNGOF (National College of French Obstetricians and Gynecologists) members population. METHODS: In November 2018, it was proceeded to a national survey from CNGOF members thanks to an online questionnaire. We collected prospectively: the answerer's characteristics, the rate of episiotomy and its systematics indications for spontaneous and operative delivery, the habits of the practitioners for the section and the reparation, the modalities of women's information and the data entered into the medical record. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty nine CNGOF members answered to the survey. They were 69% to declare performing less than 10% of episiotomy in case of spontaneous vertex delivery. The most frequent systematic indication of episiotomy was the personal history of obstetric anal sphincter injury (more than 30% of answerers). Systematic episiotomy was less frequent in case of vacuum assisted operative delivery compared to forceps (OR=0.18 [0.08-0.37]) or spatulas (OR=0.28 [0.12-0.59]). Most of practitioners (94%) declared performing mediolateral episiotomies, 64% declared cutting with an equal or more than 45° angle and 50% declared using a resorbable continuous suture technique for the reparation. Half of the answerers (46%) indicated that they inform et collected women's consent before performing an episiotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Several practices, women's information, section angle and the reparation technique are subject to change by the latest 2018 CNGOF guidelines about perineal protection.

[Pelvic Inflammatory Diseases: Updated Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Short version]. / Les infections génitales hautes. Mise à jour des recommandations pour la pratique clinique ­ texte court.

OBJECTIVES: To provide up-to-date guidelines on management of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). METHODS: An initial search of the Cochrane database, PubMed, and Embase was performed using keywords related to PID to identify reports in any language published between January 1990 and January 2012, with an update in 2018. All identified reports published in French and English relevant to the areas of focus were included. A level of evidence based on the quality of the data available was applied for each area of focus and used for the guidelines. RESULTS: PID must be suspected when spontaneous pelvic pain is associated with induced adnexal or uterine pain (grade B). Pelvic ultrasonography is necessary to exclude tubo-ovarian abscess (TOA) (grade C). Microbiological diagnosis requires endocervical and TOA sampling for molecular and bacteriological analysis (grade B). First-line treatment for uncomplicated PID combines ceftriaxone 1g, once, by intra-muscular (IM) or intra-venous (IV) route, doxycycline 100mg×2/d, and metronidazole 500mg×2/d oral (PO) for 10 days (grade A). First-line treatment for complicated PID combines IV ceftriaxone 1 to 2g/d until clinical improvement, doxycycline 100mg×2/d, IV or PO, and metronidazole 500mg×3/d, IV or PO for 14days (grade B). Drainage of TOA is indicated if the collection measures more than 3cm (grade B). Follow-up is required in women with sexually transmitted infections (STI) (grade C). The use of condoms is recommended (grade B). Vaginal sampling for microbiological diagnosis is recommended 3 to 6months after PID (grade C), before the insertion of an intra-uterine device (grade B), before elective termination of pregnancy or hysterosalpingography. Targeted antibiotics on identified bacteria are better than systematic antibioprophylaxis in those conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Current management of PID requires easily reproducible investigations and antibiotics adapted to STI and vaginal microbiota.

[Diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease: Clinical, paraclinical, imaging and laparoscopy criteria. CNGOF and SPILF Pelvic Inflammatory Diseases Guidelines]. / Diagnostic d'une infection génitale haute : critères cliniques, paracliniques, imagerie, et cœlioscopie. RPC infections génitales hautes CNGOF et SPILF.

The objective of this literature review is to update the recommendations for clinical practice about the diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), microbiologic diagnosis excluded. An adnexal pain or cervical motion tenderness are the signs that allow a positive diagnosis of PID (LE2). Associated signs (fever, leucorrhoea, metrorrhagia) reinforce clinical diagnosis (LE2). In a woman consulting for symptoms compatible with PID, a pelvic clinical examination is recommended (grade B). In cases of suspected PID, hyperleukocytosis associated with a high C-reactive protein suggests a complicated PID or a differential diagnosis such as acute appendicitis (LE3). The absence of hyperleukocytosis or normal CRP does not rule out the diagnosis of PID (LE1). When PID is suspected, a blood test with a blood count and a CRP test is recommended (grade C). Pelvic ultrasound scan does not contribute to the positive diagnosis of uncomplicated PID because it is insensitive and unspecific (LE3). However, ultrasound scan is recommended to look for signs of complicated PID (polymorphic collection) or differential diagnosis (grade C). Waiting for an ultrasound scan to be performed should not delay the start-up of antibiotic therapy. In case of diagnostic uncertainty, an abdominal-pelvic CT scan with contrast injection is useful for differential diagnosis of urinary, digestive or gynaecological origin (LE2). Laparoscopy is not recommended for the unique purpose of the positive diagnosis of PID (grade B).