Implementing the transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) "first" strategy in benign gynecological surgeries.

PURPOSE: The use of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) as the first choice of surgical route for patients scheduled to undergo conventional laparoscopy is still being debated. We aimed to evaluate and compare the outcomes of the "vNOTES first" strategy in benign gynecological cases. METHODS: All benign gynecological surgeries were initiated using vNOTES during the study period, regardless of the difficulty. Surgical outcomes, short-term patient satisfaction and sexual pain were compared between hysterectomies, adnexal and diagnostic procedures. Visual Analog Score (VAS), Patients Global Impressions of Improvements scale (PGI-I) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) were used to assess the postoperative pain, satisfaction and sexual pain, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 105 vNOTES procedures were performed during the study period: 63 (60.58%) adnexal procedures, 36 (34.62%) hysterectomies, 5 (4.81%) diagnostic procedures and one (0.96%) myomectomy. The median 24th hour VAS scores for adnexal, hysterectomy, and diagnostic procedures were 1.29 ± 1.41, 2.06 ± 2.08, and 2.6 ± 2.41, respectively. The satisfaction rate was 96.19% at the 1st postoperative week and 97.14% at the first month. There was either no change or a slight improvement in the patients' total score on the FSFI/pain domain before and after surgery. There were two conversions (1.9%) from vNOTES to laparoscopy and laparotomy, and two (5.56%) bladder injuries in hysterectomy cases. CONCLUSION: Implementing the vNOTES technique as an initial approach for all benign gynecological surgeries seems feasible, safe and satisfactory, even in those with a non-prolapsed or enlarged uterus and those that have previously undergone abdominal surgery. The pain scores were found to be low and patients stated a high satisfaction with no or better change in their sexual life.

An internally validated prediction model for critical COVID-19 infection and intensive care unit admission in symptomatic pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are at an increased risk of mortality and morbidity owing to COVID-19. Many studies have reported on the association of COVID-19 with pregnancy-specific adverse outcomes, but prediction models utilizing large cohorts of pregnant women are still lacking for estimating the risk of maternal morbidity and other adverse events. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to develop a prediction model to quantify the risk of progression to critical COVID-19 and intensive care unit admission in pregnant women with symptomatic infection. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 8 hospitals from 4 countries (the United Kingdom, Austria, Greece, and Turkey). The data extraction was from February 2020 until May 2021. Included were consecutive pregnant and early postpartum women (within 10 days of birth); reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was progression to critical illness requiring intensive care. The secondary outcomes included maternal death, preeclampsia, and stillbirth. The association between the primary outcome and 12 candidate predictors having a known association with severe COVID-19 in pregnancy was analyzed with log-binomial mixed-effects regression and reported as adjusted risk ratios. All the potential predictors were evaluated in 1 model and only the baseline factors in another. The predictive accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Of the 793 pregnant women who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were symptomatic, 44 (5.5%) were admitted to intensive care, of whom 10 died (1.3%). The 'mini-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included the following demographic and clinical variables available at disease onset: maternal age (adjusted risk ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015); body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.66; P=.010); and diagnosis in the third trimester of pregnancy (adjusted risk ratio, 3.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-8.46; P=.001). The optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.73. The 'full-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015), lower respiratory symptoms (adjusted risk ratio, 5.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.81-21.4; P=.007), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (adjusted risk ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.89; P<.001); and serum C-reactive protein (adjusted risk ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.44; P<.001), with an optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85. Neither model showed signs of a poor fit. Categorization as high-risk by either model was associated with a shorter diagnosis to intensive care unit admission interval (log-rank test P<.001, both), higher maternal death (5.2% vs 0.2%; P<.001), and preeclampsia (5.7% vs 1.0%; P<.001). A spreadsheet calculator is available for risk estimation. CONCLUSION: At presentation with symptomatic COVID-19, pregnant and recently postpartum women can be stratified into high- and low-risk for progression to critical disease, even where resources are limited. This can support the nature and place of care. These models also highlight the independent risk for severe disease associated with obesity and should further emphasize that even in the absence of other comorbidities, vaccination is particularly important for these women. Finally, the model also provides useful information for policy makers when prioritizing national vaccination programs to quickly protect those at the highest risk of critical and fatal COVID-19.

The Comparison of Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery and Conventional Laparoscopy in Opportunistic Bilateral Salpingectomy for Permanent Female Sterilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) approach with conventional laparoscopy (CL) in opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (BS) alone for permanent female sterilization as an opportunistic cancer prevention strategy. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two-centered tertiary hospitals. PATIENTS: Ninety-six women with a nonprolapsed uterus seeking definitive surgical permanent contraception. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were scheduled for BS and assigned to a study arm in a 2:1 fashion (CL:vNOTES allocation ratio) concerning patient's choice. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were followed at their postoperative first week and first month. The visual analog score (VAS), Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and Female Sexual Function Index scales were used to assess the pain, patient satisfaction, and discomfort/pain after vaginal penetration, respectively. Patients who underwent to vNOTES had a significantly higher number of previous abdominal surgery (median difference, 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-3.48; p = .016). Compared with CL, vNOTES was associated with lower 6-hour (rate ratio [RR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.77) and 24-hour (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23-0.46) postoperative VAS scores and less amount of postoperative analgesics (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.78). The slope of change in postoperative VAS scores was in a shorter time in the vNOTES group (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.60). The rate of postoperative improvement was higher in the vNOTES group than the CL group at the postoperative first week (87.5% vs 68.2%, χ2 = 4.232, p = .032) and first month (96.9% vs 87.9%, χ2 = 2.091, p = .140). The rate of patients reporting postoperative decline in Female Sexual Function Index /pain scores (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.47-1.96) was found to be similar in both of the study groups, and no postoperative complication was observed in either group. CONCLUSION: Women seeking permanent sterilization and who underwent BS for ovarian cancer risk reduction purposes had higher satisfaction, less postoperative pain, lower analgesic requirement, and similar surgical outcomes in the vNOTES group than the CL group, even in patients with previous surgeries and a nonprolapsed uterus. vNOTES approach could be the preferred method for the opportunistic BS in female sterilization.

Lung ultrasonography in pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interobserver agreement study among obstetricians.

PURPOSE: This study investigated interobserver agreement in lung ultrasonography (LUS) in pregnant women performed by obstetricians with different levels of expertise, with confirmation by an expert radiologist. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary "Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital" in April 2020. Pregnant women suspected to have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included. Two blinded experienced obstetricians performed LUS on pregnant women separately and noted their scores for 14 lung zones. Following a theoretical and hands-on practical course, one experienced obstetrician, two novice obstetric residents, and an experienced radiologist blindly evaluated anonymized and randomized still images and videoclips retrospectively. Weighted Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha tests were used to assess the interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-two pregnant women were included, with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis rate of 82.7%. In total, 336 eligible still images and 115 videoclips were included in the final analysis. The overall weighted Cohen's kappa values ranged from 0.706 to 0.912 for the 14 lung zones. There were only seven instances of major disagreement (>1 point) in the evaluation of 14 lung zones of 52 patients (n=728). The overall agreement between the radiologist and obstetricians for the still images (Krippendorff's α=0.856, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.797 to 0.915) and videoclips (Krippendorff's α=0.785; 95% CI, 0.709 to 0.861) was good. CONCLUSION: The interobserver agreement between obstetricians with different levels of experience on still images and videoclips of LUS was good. Following a brief theoretical course, obstetricians' performance of LUS in pregnant women and interpretation of pre-acquired LUS images can be considered consistent.

Anxiety levels and obsessive compulsion symptoms of pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Reliable data regarding maternal mental well-being during the Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic are scarce. This study aimed to assess the state/trait anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms of pregnant women and compare those with the non-pregnant population using patient-reported validated outcome measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective case-control study was conducted at a tertiary 'Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital' in Istanbul, Turkey in April, 2020. Pregnant and non-pregnant women were consecutively allocated to two groups regardless of gestational age. The primary outcome was to identify the anxiety levels and obsessive-compulsive symptoms of pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic using the State-Trait Anxiety inventory (STAI) and Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive inventory (MOCI), respectively. RESULTS: Two hundred three pregnant women and 101 non-pregnant women were included. The mean STAI-S questionnaire score of pregnant and nonpregnant women was 41.96±9.15 and 46.62±12, respectively (p=0.001). The overall incidence of STAI >40 in pregnant and non-pregnant women was 62.6% and 73.3%, respectively. The mean total score of MOCI was 17.9±6.7 and 15±6.6 in pregnant and non-pregnant women, respectively. The overall incidence of 30-item-MOCI ≥13.1 in pregnant and non-pregnant women was 61.6% (125/203) and 30.7% (31/103), respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: State anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in pregnant women were found increased during the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Pregnant women showed more favourable anxiety levels compared with non-pregnant women. These findings can be used to improve the coping skills of pregnant women during the pandemic, to prepare for the post-pandemic period, and to deal with the long-term mental health impact of COVID-19.

How to perform and interpret the lung ultrasound by the obstetricians in pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence for the use of lung ultrasound scan (LUS) examinations in coronavirus 2019 pneumonia is rapidly growing. The safe and non-ionizing nature of LUS drew attention, particularly for pregnant women. This study aimed to contribute to the interpretation of LUS findings in pregnant women for the obstetricians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LUS was performed to pregnant women suspected of or diagnosed as having Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first 24 hours of admission. Fourteen areas (3 posterior, 2 lateral, and 2 anterior) were scanned per patient for at least 10 seconds along the indicated anatomical landmarks. The scan was performed in supine, right-sided and left-sided positions, respectively. Each area was given a score between 0 and 3 according to the specific pattern. RESULTS: In this study, 21 still images and 21 videoclips that enabled dynamic and real-time evaluation were provided. Pleural line assessment, physiologic A-lines, pathologic B-lines, light beam pattern, white lung pattern, and specific patterns for quick recognition and evaluation are described. CONCLUSION: The potential advantages and limitations of LUS and its areas of use for obstetricians are discussed. LUS is a promising supplementary imaging tool during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. It is easy to perform and may be feasible in the hands of obstetricians after a brief didactic course. It may be a firstline imaging modality for pregnant women.