EBCOG position statement on Inequalities in screening for cervical and breast cancer.

Gynaecological cancers, namely breast and cervical cancer represent a high burden in women's health. It is well established that cervical and breast cancer screening programmes are effective in reducing morbidity and mortality. It is of the most importance to define strategies to provide a universal access to screening. In European countries, significant progress has been made over the past years concerning screening strategies, namely the choice of screening test, its frequency as well as the age to start and stop the screening. Introduction of Human Papillomavirus vaccination programmes is also making a measurable impact to reduce cervical cancer prevalence and mortality. Our survey has shown a variation among European countries in delivery of cervical and breast cancer screening programmes. These variations can be due to organizational, economic or cultural reasons. The European Board and College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology calls for an implementation of a unified policy of prevention, screening and early detection of cervical and breast cancer across Europe to optimize clinical outcomes and reduce variations.

Provision of screening services for cervical and breast cancer - A scientific study commissioned by the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG).

OBJECTIVE: Cancer screening can play an important role in early detection, improving treatment outcomes and reducing morbidity and mortality. Breast and cervical cancers belong to the most common gynaecological cancers group. Countries provide different screening programmes on its eligible population basis centred on different health care policies. This scientific study aims to assess and understand the health inequalities in the member countries of the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG) as regards screening programmes of gynaecological cancer, with a special focus on breast and cervical cancers' screening strategies. STUDY DESIGN: A descriptive questionnaire-based study was conducted, addressed to EBCOG member countries. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of the countries have an organized national or regional screening programme for cervical cancer. Of these, 45% of countries use both cytology and testing for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) as screening test, 31% use cytology exclusively and 17% only perform HPV testing. Considerable differences were found regarding the interval of screening test: there are countries performing HPV detection triennially, while others perform only conventional cytology every 5 years. Sixty-nine percent of countries included in this study begin screening for cervical cancer in women aged 25 to 29 years, four of them using HPV detection as the screening test. Six countries begin cervical cancer screening before the age of 25. As regards vaccination against HPV, almost all countries have implemented national HPV vaccination programme, except in Poland and Turkey. The 9-valent HPV vaccine is the most frequently offered (77% of countries) and the majority vaccination programmes include both girls and boys. As regards breast cancer screening, all thirty-two countries have an implemented screening programme. All countries perform mammography as the screening test, 62.5% of them begin in women aged 50 to 54, with a 2-yearly interval in the majority. In five countries, screening programmes are performed biennially, starting between 45 and 49 years old. Seven countries start in women aged 41 to 44. CONCLUSIONS: There are discrepancies around gynaecological cancer screenings provision among EBCOG member countries. It is important to establish European recommendations about screening for gynaecological cancers, in order to standardize the access to equitable better health care in gynaecological cancers within Europe.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis.

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted health systems worldwide, particularly cancer care. Because the actual implications of these changes on gynecological oncology healthcare are still unclear, we aim to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on the diagnosis and management of gynecological cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective observational study, including patients diagnosed with gynecological malignancies between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were included into three groups based on the timing of cancer diagnosis: pre-pandemic (2019), pandemic with high restrictions (2020) and pandemic recovery (2021). Results: Overall, 234 patients were diagnosed with gynecological cancer during the period of study. A decrease in the number of newly diagnosed cervical cancers and other rare tumors (leiomyosarcoma, invasive hydatidiform mole) was apparent in 2020. Some aggressive histological types of endometrial and ovarian cancer were more commonly diagnosed in the pandemic recovery group (p < 0.05), although no differences were demonstrated concerning tumor staging in all gynecological cancers. The median time between the first multidisciplinary team meeting and the treatment initiation was higher after the COVID-19 pandemic in endometrial cancer (23.0 vs. 34.0 vs. 36.0 days, p < 0.05). Patients with ovarian cancer were more frequently proposed for neoadjuvant therapy in 2020 compared to the other periods (33.3% vs. 55.0% vs. 10.0% p < 0.05). A significant reduction in the laparoscopic approach was observed during 2020 in endometrial cancer (32.1% vs. 14.3% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were registered regarding median hospitalization days or intra- and post-operative complications between these periods. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the diagnosis and management of most gynecological malignancies, namely, on time to first treatment, chosen oncological therapies and surgical approaches. These results suggest important clinical and healthcare implications that should be addressed in future prospective studies.

[Demographic and Professional Characteristics of Specialists in Obstetrics and Gynecology Registered in Portugal: Needs, Resources and Challenges]. / Características Demográficas e Profissionais dos Especialistas em Ginecologia-Obstetrícia Registados em Portugal: Necessidades, Recursos e Desafios.

INTRODUCTION: The demographic and professional characteristics of specialists in Obstetrics and Gynecology registered in Portugal are presented and current and future needs assessed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An analysis of the data from Instituto Nacional de Estatística, Ordem dos Médicos and a survey sent to the directors of the departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Portuguese hospitals was perfomed. In order to calculate the necessary number of specialists, established indicators of the activity of the specialty were used. RESULTS: In 2018, there were 1 437 441 consultations of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 89 110 major gynecologic surgeries and 85 604 deliveries. For that, 1065 Obstetrics and Gynecology physicians, working 40 hours per week, with no more than 40% aged 55 years of age and older or including 30 residents per year, are deemed necessary. According to the National Institute of Statistics, in the same year there were 1143 specialists in Portuguese hospitals, of which 234 worked in private hospitals. On the other hand, 1772 specialists were registered with the Ordem dos Médicos: 1163 (66%) were aged 55 years old or above and 84% of specialists under the age of 40 were females. In 2020, there were 864 specialists, 46% of which aged years of age and older working in 39 out of the 41 public or public-private departments that answered the survey. In 2035, an increase of 7% in the required number of specialists is expected. CONCLUSION: In Portugal, there is not lack of Obstetrics and Gynecology specialists in absolute numbers, but the large number of specialists aged 55 years of age and older, who are exempt from shifts in emergency department work, and the existence of regional asymmetries contribute to the perpetuation of some shortages of these healthcare professionals in several departments, namely in public hospitals.

Introdução: Apresentam-se as caraterísticas demográficas e profissionais dos especialistas de Ginecologia-Obstetrícia registados em Portugal e avaliam-se necessidades atuais e futuras.Material e Métodos: Analisaram-se dados do Instituto Nacional de Estatística, da Ordem dos Médicos e de resposta a questionário enviado a diretores de serviços hospitalares portugueses de Ginecologia-Obstetrícia. Calcularam-se as necessidades de especialistas com base em indicadores estabelecidos de atividade médica da especialidade.Resultados: Em 2018, registaram-se, em Portugal, 1 437 441 consultas da especialidade, 89 110 grandes cirurgias e 85 604 partos. Para essa atividade calcula-se serem necessários 1065 médicos da especialidade, em regime de 40 horas semanais, dos quais não mais do que 40% com idade igual ou superior a 55 anos; para manter este número são necessários 30 internos por ano. Segundo o Instituto Nacional de Estatística, nesse ano existiam 1143 especialistas nos hospitais portugueses, 234 dos quais em hospitais privados. Por outro lado, estavam inscritos 1772 especialistas na Ordem dos Médicos, dos quais 1163 (66%) apresentavam uma idade igual ou superior a 55 anos, sendo 84% dos especialistas com menos de 40 anos do sexo feminino. Em 2020, nos 39 dos 41 serviços públicos e público-privados que responderam ao questionário, existiam 864 especialistas, dos quais 395 (46%) com idade igual ou superior a 55 anos. Para 2035 prevê-se um aumento de 7% nas necessidades de especialistas desta área.Conclusão: Em Portugal não há falta de especialistas de Ginecologia-Obstetrícia em número absoluto, mas a existência de um elevado número de especialistas com idade igual ou superior a 55 anos, que tem direito a deixar de prestar atividade nos Serviços de Urgência, e de assimetrias regionais, contribuem para que continuem a existir algumas carências destes profissionais em vários serviços, nomeadamente em hospitais públicos.

Umbilical Cord Blood Gas Analysis, Obstetric Performance and Perinatal Outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze if umbilical artery pH (pHua) ≤7.00 and umbilical artery blood deficit (BDua) ≥12.00 mmol/L are good predictors of adverse neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This was an observational, longitudinal and retrospective cohort study, conducted at the department of obstetrics and gynecology of Centro Hospitalar Tondela Viseu between September 2013 and September 2015. Total cohort and subgroup analysis were performed: group A-women with umbilical cord blood gas analysis (UCBGA) performed for non-reassuring fetal cardiotocographic patterns, placental abruption, or shoulder dystocia; and group B-all the others. Assays were made with the software SPSS for Windows, Versions 20.0 and 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). RESULTS: A total of 428 UCBGAs met the inclusion criteria. The group analysis revealed an association between group A and pHua ≤7.00, as well as between BDua ≥12.00 mmol/L and 1st minute Apgar score ≤4 (p = 0.011). After the application of the logistic regression models in the total cohort analysis, pHua ≤7.00 had an impact in the occurrence of acute neonatal hypoxia (odds ratio [OR]: 6.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-37.06; p = 0.029); multiparous women had a higher risk of delivering a newborn with first minute Apgar score ≤4 and acute neonatal hypoxia (OR: 5.38; 95% CI: 1.35-21.43; p = 0.017; and OR: 2.66; 95% CI: 1.03-6.89, p = 0.043, respectively); women who had urologic problems during pregnancy had a higher risk of delivering a newborn with 5th minute Apgar score ≤7 (OR: 15.17; 95% CI: 1.29-177.99; p = 0.030); and shoulder dystocia represented a 15 times higher risk of acute neonatal hypoxia (OR: 14.82; 95% CI: 2.20-99.60; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The pHua and the BDua are predictors of adverse neonatal outcome, and UCBGA is a useful tool for screening newborns at risk. Universal UCBGA should be considered for all deliveries, as it is an accurate screening test for neonatal hypoxia.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar se o pH da artéria umbilical (pHua) ≤7,00 e o déficit de bases da artéria umbilical (BDua) ≥12,00 mmol/L são preditores de desfechos neonatais adversos. MéTODOS: Estudo observacional, longitudinal e retrospectivo, realizado no Serviço de Ginecolocgia e Obstetrícia do Centro Hospitalar Tondela Viseu durante o período de setembro de 2013 a setembro de 2015. Foi realizada a análise de toda a coorte e de dois subgrupos: grupo A­mulheres cuja gasometria do cordão umbilical (UCBGA, na sigla em inglês) foi realizada por traçado cardiotocográfico não tranquilizador, descolamento prematuro de placenta normalmente inserida, ou distócia de ombros; e grupo B­todas as outras. A análise estatística foi realizada com o programa SPSS for Windows, Versões 20.0 e 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) RESULTADOS: Um total de 428 UCBGAs cumpriram os critérios de inclusão. A análise de grupo revelou uma associação entre o grupo A e pHua ≤7,00 (p = 0,002), e entre BDua ≥12,00 mmol/L e índice de Apgar ao 1o minuto ≤4 (p = 0,011). Após a aplicação dos modelos de regressão logística na análise da coorte total, pHua ≤7.00 teve impacto na ocorrência de hipóxia neonatal aguda (razão de probabilidade [RP]: 6,71; 95% índice de confiança [IC]: 1,21­37,06; p = 0,029); verificou-se maior risco de recém-nascido com índice de Apgar ao 1o minuto ≤4 e hipóxia neonatal aguda nas multíparas (RP: 5,38; 95% IC: 1,35­21,.43; p = 0,017; e RP: 2,66; 95% IC: 1,03­6,89; p = 0,043, respectivamente); e de recém-nascido com índice de Apgar ao quinto minuto ≤7 nas mulheres com problemas urológicos na gravidez (RP: 15,17; 95% IC: 1,29­177,99; p = 0,030); e a ocorrência de distócia de ombros aumentou 15 vezes o risco de hipóxia neonatal aguda (RP: 14,82; 95% IC: 2,20­99,60; p = 0,006). CONCLUSãO: O pHua e o BDua são preditores de desfecho neonatal adverso, e a UCBGA é uma ferramenta útil no rastreio dos recém-nascidos em risco. A realização universal de UCBGA deve ser considerada em todos os partos, visto ser um teste de rastreio objetivo de hipóxia neonatal.