Interstitial pregnancy management: A multicentric analysis of 98 patients from the FRANCOGENT group comparing surgery and medical treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes associated with each therapeutic option for patients diagnosed with interstitial pregnancy (IP). METHODS: We conducted a multicentric retrospective cohort study within the departments of Gynecology and Obstetrics involved in the Francogent research group. Women treated for an interstitial pregnancy between January 2008 to December 2019 were included. Three therapeutic options were evaluated: surgical treatment (ST); in situ methotrexate combined with systemic methotrexate (IS-MTX); and systemic methotrexate (IM-MTX). Success of first-line treatment was defined by hCG negativation (<5I U/L). Secondary outcomes included the need for secondary surgical procedure, secondary medical treatment, emergency surgery, postoperative complications, duration of hospitalization, and delay before hCG negativation. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were managed for IP: 42 (42.9%) patients had IM-MTX; 34 (34.7%) had IS-MTX; and 22 (22.4%) had ST. First-line treatment was successful in all patients of the ST group (22/22, 100%), in 31% of patients within the IM-MTX group (13/42) and 70.6% (24/34) in the IS-MTX group. The sole parameter associated with the risk of treatment failure was the mode of methotrexate administration. The size of the gestational sac or the presence of fetal heartbeat was not associated with decreased medical treatment (IS or IM-MTX) efficiency. CONCLUSION: Either ST or IS-MTX are good options for IP treatment associated with high success rates. A single-dose regimen of IM-MTX is less efficient than IS-MTX or ST. Symptomatic patients with severity criteria should always undergo emergency surgery. IP remains a high-risk condition that should be managed, whenever possible, in referral centers to potentialize the chances of favorable outcomes.

Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse: Insights for a challenging surgical setting.

BACKGROUND: No consensus exists regarding the management of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The aim of this study was to evaluate robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse (POP), and to investigate postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study including 10 consecutive patients who underwent a robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for symptomatic POP recurrence from February 2017 to December 2019. Recurrence rates and patient satisfaction, measured by the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) were recorded. RESULTS: Median age was 57 years (IQR: 54-67). No intraoperative complications were reported. The median hospital stay after surgery was 2 nights (IQR: 1-4). Two patients (20%) experienced early recurrence: at 1 month for one and at 4.5 months for the other. The median follow-up for the remaining eight patients was 18 months (IQR: 12-23). Among the recurrence-free patients, the median PFIQ-7 score was 11.4 at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy is feasible and safe for the management of POP recurrence, with a high patient satisfaction.