The effectiveness of prolonged downregulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (GnRHa) treatment in women with adenomyosis undergoing IVF/ICSI: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Adenomyosis can reduce the chance of clinical pregnancy in women undergoing assisted conception. Treatment with prolonged gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (GnRHa) downregulation prior to IVF/ICSI has been postulated to improve pregnancy outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prolonged GnRHa treatment (minimum one month) versus no pre-treatment in women with adenomyosis undergoing IVF/ICSI using a systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched electronic databases: Embase (OVID), MEDLINE® (OVID), APA PsycInfo (OVID), Maternity & Infant Care Database (MIDIRS (OVID), HMIC Health Management Information Consortium (OVID) and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until 27th of March 2023. STUDY SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS: We included studies that reported on women with adenomyosis receiving GnRHa to down-regulate the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis for one to six months before IVF/ICSI. We pooled data using the Haensel-Mantel method and reported using Odds Ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottowa Scale and confidence in evidence using the GRADE criteria. Bias analysis was conducted via the Cochrane recommended tool (RevMan Web, Academic License). MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: We screened 365 citations and eight retrospective studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 2422 women). The median age was 34 years [IQR 31.95-35.05], median BMI 21.30 kg/m2 [IQR 21.05-23.55] and median duration of GnRHa downregulation was 2.5 months [Range 1-4; IQR 1.37-3]. Women with adenomyosis receiving prolonged GnRHa treatment had a higher implantation rate 1/OR 1.69 [95 % CI 1.09, 2.56], I2 = 81 %, (P = 0.02) and clinical pregnancy rate 1/OR 1.42 [95 % CI 1.03, 2.0], I2 70 %, P = 0.03. There was no overall difference in live birth rate 1/OR 1.12 [95 % CI 0.70, 1.79], I2 = 78 %, p = 0.63), miscarriage rate 1/OR 0.92 [95 % CI 0.63, 1.28, P = 0.61, I2 0 % or mean number of oocytes retrieved (10 oocytes [IQR 8.95; 11.15] vs. 9.28 [IQR 8; 10.20], p = 0.22) between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The benefit of prolonged GnRHa treatment in women with adenomyosis undergoing assisted conception treatment is uncertain based on existing retrospective studies. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were higher following prolonged downregulation in this population, though there was no statistically significant difference in live birth and miscarriage rates. Given the limited, low-quality existing data, there is a need for a well-designed, prospective randomised controlled trial to precisely evaluate the effectiveness of prolonged GnRHa treatment in this population.

Comparing the treatment of endometriosis-related pain by excision of endometriosis or hysterectomy: A multicentre prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of endometriosis excision alone to excision plus hysterectomy, with and without bilateral oophorectomy, for endometriosis-related symptoms. DESIGN: Multicentre prospective cohort. SETTING: Eighty-six specialist endometriosis centres. POPULATION: Women undergoing rectovaginal endometriosis surgery between 2009 and 2021. METHODS: We performed multivariable regression with random effects for patient and centre, controlling for age, BMI, smoking, laparoscopic versus open approach and type of bowel surgery performed, with sensitivity analysis for loss to follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain scores, bowel symptoms and quality-of-life measures. RESULTS: Compared to endometriosis excision alone, women undergoing hysterectomy with conservation of ovaries had greater improvement in non-cyclical pain (MD: 1.41/10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.78, p < 0.001), dyspareunia (MD: 1.12/10, 95% CI: 0.71-1.53, p < 0.001), back pain (MD: 1.29/10, 95% CI: 0.92-1.67, p < 0.001) and quality-of-life scores (MD: 8.77/100, 95% CI: 5.79-11.75, p < 0.001) at 24 months post-operatively. Women undergoing hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy also had greater improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain (MD: 2.22/10, 95% CI: 1.80-2.63, p < 0.001), dyspareunia (MD: 1.05/10, 95% CI: 0.59-1.52, p < 0.001), back pain (MD: 1.18/10, 95% CI: 0.77-1.59, p < 0.001) and quality of life (MD: 12.41/100, 95% CI: 9.07-15.74, p < 0.001) at 24 months compared to endometriosis excision alone. Compared to hysterectomy with ovarian conservation, hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy was associated with greater improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain (MD: 0.81/10, 95% CI: 0.32-1.30, p = 0.001) at 24 months and quality of life (MD: 3.74/100, 95% CI: 0.56-6.92, p = 0.021) at 12 months, although this result was sensitive to loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo endometriosis excision plus hysterectomy experience greater improvement in pain and quality of life compared to those who have endometriosis excision alone. There are additional benefits of bilateral oophorectomy with hysterectomy, although its value is less clear due to loss of follow-up.

Optimizing intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of clinical treatment add-ons.

INTRODUCTION: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is one of the most widespread fertility treatments. However, IUI protocols vary significantly amongst fertility clinics. Various add-on interventions have been proposed to boost success rates. These are mostly chosen arbitrarily or empirically. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness and safety of add-on interventions to the standard IUI protocol and to provide evidence-based recommendations on techniques used to optimize the clinical outcomes of IUI treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analyses were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A computerized literature search was performed from database inception to May 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included reporting on couples/single women undergoing IUI with any protocol for any indication using partner's or donor sperm. A meta-analysis based on random effects was performed for each outcome and add-on. Three authors independently assessed the trials for quality and risk of bias and overall certainty of evidence. Uncertainties were resolved through consensus. Primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) or live birth rate (LBR) per cycle/per woman randomized. Registration number PROSPERO: CRD42022300857. RESULTS: Sixty-six RCTs were included in the analysis (16 305 participants across 20 countries). Vaginal progesterone as luteal phase support in stimulated cycles was found to significantly increase LBR/OPR (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.72, I2 = 4.9%) (moderate/low certainty of the evidence). Endometrial scratch prior/during stimulated IUI cycles may increase LBR/OPR (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.03-2.01, I2 = 1.8%), but evidence is very uncertain. Results from two studies suggest that follicular phase ovarian stimulation increases LBR/OPR (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.00-1.94, I2 = 0%) (low certainty of evidence). No significant difference was seen for the primary outcome for the other studied interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that vaginal luteal phase progesterone support probably improves LBR/OPR in stimulated IUI treatments. In view of moderate/low certainty of the evidence more research is needed for solid conclusions. Further research is also recommended for the use of endometrial scratch and ovarian stimulation. Future studies should report on results according to subfertility background as it is possible that different add-ons could benefit specific patient groups.

Pharmacological non-hormonal treatment options for male infertility: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Male factor infertility affect up to 50% of couples unable to conceive spontaneously. Several non-hormonal pharmacological treatments have been proposed to boost spermatogenesis and increase chances of conception in men with infertility. Still, no clear evidence exists on the most effective treatment strategy. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the effectiveness of non-hormonal pharmacological treatment options for men with infertility using a systematic review and network meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL until October 2023 for randomised/quasi-randomised trials that evaluated any non-hormonal pharmacological treatment options for men with idiopathic semen abnormalities or those with hypogonadism. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses using a random effect model. We assessed risk of bias, heterogeneity, and network inconsistency. We calculated the mean rank and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for each intervention the maximum likelihood to achieve each of reported outcomes. We reported primarily on sperm concentration and other important semen and biochemical outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence-intervals(CI). RESULTS: We included 14 randomised trials evaluating four treatments (Clomiphene citrate, Tamoxifen, Aromatase inhibitors, anti-oxidants) and their combinations in 1342 men. The overall quality of included trials was low. Sperm concentration improved with clomiphene compared to anti-oxidants (SMD 2.15, 95%CI 0.78-3.52), aromatase inhibitor (SMD 2.93, 95%CI 1.23-4.62), tamoxifen (SMD - 1.96, 95%CI -3.57; -0.36) but not compared to placebo (SMD - 1.53, 95%CI -3.52- 0.47). Clomiphene had the highest likelihood to achieve the maximum change in sperm concentration (SUCRA 97.4). All treatments showed similar effect for sperm motility, semen volume, and normal sperm morphology. FSH levels showed significant improvement with clomiphene vs.anti-oxidant (SMD 1.48, 95%CI 0.44-2.51) but not compared to placebo. The evidence networks for LH and testosterone suffered from significant inconsistency (p = 0.01) with similar trend of improvement with clomiphene compared to other treatments but not compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of Clomiphene, tamoxifen, and aromatase inhibitors to optimise semen parameters in men with infertility. Future randomised trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of clomiphene in improving fertility outcomes in men. PROSPERO: CRD42023430179.

Multivariable prediction models for fetal macrosomia and large for gestational age: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The identification of large for gestational age (LGA) and macrosomic fetuses is essential for counselling and managing these pregnancies. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature for multivariable prediction models for LGA and macrosomia, assessing the performance, quality and applicability of the included model in clinical practice. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched until June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included observational and experimental studies reporting the development and/or validation of any multivariable prediction model for fetal macrosomia and/or LGA. We excluded studies that used a single variable or did not evaluate model performance. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted using the Checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies checklist. The model performance measures discrimination, calibration and validation were extracted. The quality and completion of reporting within each study was assessed by its adherence to the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) checklist. The risk of bias and applicability were measured using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 8442 citations were identified, with 58 included in the analysis: 32/58 (55.2%) developed, 21/58 (36.2%) developed and internally validated and 2/58 (3.4%) developed and externally validated a model. Only three studies externally validated pre-existing models. Macrosomia and LGA were differentially defined by many studies. In total, 111 multivariable prediction models were developed using 112 different variables. Model discrimination was wide ranging area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC 0.56-0.96) and few studies reported calibration (11/58, 19.0%). Only 5/58 (8.6%) studies had a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There are currently no multivariable prediction models for macrosomia/LGA that are ready for clinical implementation.

Efficacy of virtual reality for pain relief in medical procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Effective pain control is crucial to optimise the success of medical procedures. Immersive virtual reality (VR) technology could offer an effective non-invasive, non-pharmacological option to distract patients and reduce their experience of pain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Immersive virtual reality (VR) technology in reducing patient's pain perception during various medical procedures by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and SIGLE until December 2022 for all randomised clinical trials (RCT) evaluating any type of VR in patients undergoing any medical procedure. We conducted a random effect meta-analysis summarising standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated heterogeneity using I 2 and explored it using subgroup and meta-regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, we included 92 RCTs (n = 7133 participants). There was a significant reduction in pain scores with VR across all medical procedures (n = 83, SMD - 0.78, 95% CI - 1.00 to - 0.57, I 2 = 93%, p = < 0.01). Subgroup analysis showed varied reduction in pain scores across trial designs [crossover (n = 13, SMD - 0.86, 95% CI - 1.23 to - 0.49, I 2 = 72%, p = < 0.01) vs parallel RCTs (n = 70, SMD - 0.77, 95% CI - 1.01 to - 0.52, I 2 = 90%, p = < 0.01)]; participant age groups [paediatric (n = 43, SMD - 0.91, 95% CI - 1.26 to - 0.56, I 2 = 87%, p = < 0.01) vs adults (n = 40, SMD - 0.66, 95% CI - 0.94 to - 0.39, I 2 = 89%, p = < 0.01)] or procedures [venepuncture (n = 32, SMD - 0.99, 95% CI - 1.52 to - 0.46, I 2 = 90%, p = < 0.01) vs childbirth (n = 7, SMD - 0.99, 95% CI - 1.59 to - 0.38, I 2 = 88%, p = < 0.01) vs minimally invasive medical procedures (n = 25, SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.79 to - 0.23, I 2 = 85%, p = < 0.01) vs dressing changes in burn patients (n = 19, SMD - 0.8, 95% CI - 1.16 to - 0.45, I 2 = 87%, p = < 0.01)]. We explored heterogeneity using meta-regression which showed no significant impact of different covariates including crossover trials (p = 0.53), minimally invasive procedures (p = 0.37), and among paediatric participants (p = 0.27). Cumulative meta-analysis showed no change in overall effect estimates with the additional RCTs since 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Immersive VR technology offers effective pain control across various medical procedures, albeit statistical heterogeneity. Further research is needed to inform the safe adoption of this technology across different medical disciplines.

Healthcare and research priorities for women with polycystic ovary syndrome in the UK National Health Service: A modified Delphi method.

OBJECTIVE: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a chronic lifelong condition affecting up to 20% of women worldwide. There is limited input from affected women to guide the provision of healthcare services and future research needs. Our objective was to scope the healthcare and research priorities of women with PCOS in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: A three-staged modified Delphi method, consisting of two questionnaires and a consensus meeting involving lay representatives and healthcare professionals. PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Lay patient representatives of women with PCOS. Participants were asked to identify and rank healthcare and research priorities for their importance. RESULTS: Six hundred and twenty-four lay participants took part in our Delphi method. Over 98% were diagnosed with PCOS (614/624, 98.4%). More than half experienced difficulties to receive a PCOS diagnosis (375/624, 60%), and the majority found it difficult to access specialised PCOS health services in the NHS (594/624, 95%). The top two healthcare priorities included better education for health professionals on the diagnosis and management of PCOS (238/273, 87.1%) and the need to set up specialist PCOS services (234/273, 85.7%). The top two research priorities focused on identifying better treatments for irregular periods (233/273, 85.3%) followed by better tests for early PCOS diagnosis (230/273, 84.2%). CONCLUSIONS: We identified 13 healthcare and 14 research priorities that reflect the current health needs of women with PCOS in the United Kingdom. Adopting these priorities in future healthcare and research planning will help to optimise the health of women with PCOS and increase patient satisfaction.

Non-oestrogen-based and complementary therapies for menopause.

Women are living a significant portion of their adult lives in the post-reproductive phase, and many seek help for debilitating menopausal symptoms. Every individual's experience of menopausal transition is unique. Adopting a holistic approach to managing the menopause using a combination of lifestyle, hormonal, and non-hormonal interventions is key to maximise the quality of life of affected women. However, many opt to use non hormonal options or have contraindications to using hormonal therapy. Studies have shown that several pharmacological non-hormonal medications such as SSRIs, SSRI/SNRIs, Gabapentin, and Pregabalin are effective for managing vasomotor symptoms as well as other menopausal symptoms. Their main side effects are dry mouth, nausea, constipation, reduced libido, and loss of appetite. Clonidine is the only non-hormonal drug which is licenced for control of vasomotor symptoms in the UK, but has several side effects including dizziness and sleep disturbance. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy is recommended as a treatment for anxiety, sleep problems and vasomotor symptoms related to menopausal transition. Evidence for clinical efficacy and safety of herbal remedies and alternative therapies remains weak. Studies with neurokinin receptor 3 antagonists on women with hot flushes have shown improvement in vasomotor symptoms and results of large-scale studies are awaited.

In praise of ovulation induction for the management of anovulatory subfertility.

Rapid advances in assisted reproductive technology have revolutionized fertility treatments for couples worldwide seeking a pregnancy. Although this is promising, concerns are emerging over the overuse of unnecessary assisted conception treatments, particularly among couples with anovulatory subfertility. Some experts are calling for the cessation of ovulation induction as the primary treatment of anovulatory subfertility in favour of more sophisticated assisted conception treatments. In the absence of other causes of subfertility, ovulation induction in patients with type 1 and type 2 anovulation disorders can achieve an up to 80% ovulation rate with a 40% cumulative pregnancy rate and few adverse effects. Considering the various risks and high costs associated with assisted reproductive technology treatments, it is hard to argue for their cost-effectiveness when simpler, safer and cheaper pharmacological ovulation induction could achieve comparable pregnancy rates. We argue here for the safe, effective and ethical use of ovulation induction in this population, supplemented by a judicious use of assisted conception treatments. We emphasize the essential role of ovulation induction as a first-line intervention for couples with anovulatory subfertility delivered within a patient-centred multidisciplinary care model and with a clear escalation pathway to use assisted reproductive technology treatments based on the person's response, characteristics and treatment preference.

The risk of miscarriage following COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women who received any of the COVID-19 vaccines? SUMMARY ANSWER: There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are associated with an increased risk of miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the mass roll-out of vaccines helped to boost herd immunity and reduced hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality. Still, many were concerned about the safety of vaccines for pregnancy, which may have limited their uptake among pregnant women and those planning a pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until June 2022 using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included observational and interventional studies that enrolled pregnant women and evaluated any of the available COVID-19 vaccines compared to placebo or no vaccination. We primarily reported on miscarriage in addition to ongoing pregnancy and/or live birth. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included data from 21 studies (5 randomized trials and 16 observational studies) reporting on 149 685 women. The pooled rate of miscarriage among women who received a COVID-19 vaccine was 9% (n = 14 749/123 185, 95% CI 0.05-0.14). Compared to those who received a placebo or no vaccination, women who received a COVID-19 vaccine did not have a higher risk of miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.89-1.28, I2 35.8%) and had comparable rates for ongoing pregnancy or live birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03, I2 10.72%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our analysis was limited to observational evidence with varied reporting, high heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies, which may limit the generalizability and confidence in our findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: COVID-19 vaccines are not associated with an increase in the risk of miscarriage or reduced rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth among women of reproductive age. The current evidence remains limited and larger population studies are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No direct funding was provided to support this work. M.P.R. was funded by the Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health Grant No: MR/N022556/1. B.H.A.W. hold a personal development award from the National Institute of Health Research in the UK. All authors declare no conflict of interest. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289098.

Reproductive outcomes after surgical sperm retrieval in couples with male factor subfertility: a 10-year retrospective national cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To determine any significant differences in the reproductive outcome from intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) between cycles using fresh and cryopreserved sperm and between cycles using epididymal and testicular sperm. DESIGN: A retrospective national cohort study using data from the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, including all ICSI cycles performed in the United Kingdom over a 10-year period. SETTING: Hospital. PATIENT(S): All nondonor ICSI cycles from 2008 to 2017 categorized by sperm source and cryopreservation status. INTERVENTION(S): Intracytoplasmic sperm injection with SSR using fresh or cryopreserved sperm and using ejaculated, testicular, and epididymal sperm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth rate, pregnancy rate, and implantation rate. RESULT(S): We analyzed data from 214,649 ICSI cycles, including 199,818 cycles of ejaculated sperm, 5,646 cycles of epididymal sperm, and 9,185 cycles of testicular sperm. Live births rates per ICSI cycle were 28.5%, 30.6%, and 28.7% for ejaculated, epididymal, and testicular sperm cycles, respectively. Epididymal sperm cycles had a higher live birth rate than that of testicular sperm cycles (odds ratio [OR], 1.067; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.014-1.123). This was despite a higher mean male age (42.5 vs. 40.6 years; 95% CI of difference, 1.81-1.85 years) and female age (34.3 vs. 34.0 years; 95% CI of difference, 0.32-0.34 years) in epididymal cycles than in testicular cycles. Implantation (61.2% vs. 58.0%; OR, 1.086; 95% CI, 1.041-1.133) and clinical pregnancy rates (34.3% vs. 31.3%; OR, 1.085; 95% CI, 1.039-1.132) were also higher in epididymal cycles than in testicular cycles. There were no statistically significant differences in outcomes between cycles using fresh sperm and those using cryopreserved sperm for SSR-ICSI. CONCLUSION(S): Our study indicates that reproductive outcomes of SSR-ICSI are at least comparable with those of ICSI using ejaculated sperm and does not support the preferential use of fresh sperm over cryopreserved sperm in SSR-ICSI. Births per SSR-ICSI cycle were higher for cycles using epididymal sperm than for cycles using testicular sperm; however, the differences were small, which may provide reassurance to patients undergoing these procedures. The results must be interpreted with caution because multivariable analysis was not possible because of aggregation of data.

Long term pregnancy outcomes of women with cancer following fertility preservation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: As cancer survivorship increases, there is higher uptake of fertility preservation treatments among affected women. However, there is limited evidence on the subsequent use of preserved material and pregnancy outcomes in women who underwent fertility preservation (FP) before cancer treatments. We aimed to systematically review the long-term reproductive and pregnancy outcomes in this cohort of women. PATIENTS: Women who underwent any type of the following FP treatments: embryo cryopreservation (EC), oocyte cryopreservation (OC) and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC)) before any planned cancer treatment. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and HTA) from inception until May 2021 for all observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We extracted data on reproductive and pregnancy outcomes in duplicate and assessed the risk of bias in included studies using the ROBINS-I tool. We pooled data using a random-effects model and reported using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was live birth rate and other important reproductive and pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: Of 5405 citations, we screened 103 and included 26 observational studies (n = 7061 women). Hematologic malignancy was the commonest cause for seeking FP treatments, followed by breast and gynecology cancers. Twelve studies reported on OTC (12/26, 46 %), eight included EC (8/26, 30 %), and twelve reported on OC (12/26, 46 %). The cumulative live birth rate following any FP treatment was 0.046 (95 %CI 0.029-0.066). Only 8 % of women returned to use their frozen reproductive material (558/7037, 8.0 %), resulting in 210 live births in total, including assisted conceptions following EC/OC/OTC and natural conceptions following OTC. The odds for live birth was OR 0.38 (95 %CI 0.29-0.48 I2 83.7 %). The odds for live birth was the highest among women who had EC (OR 0.45, 95 %CI 0.14-0.76, I2 95.1 %), followed by the OTC group (OR 0.37, 95 %CI 0.22-0.53, I2 88.7 %) and OC group (OR 0.31, 95 %CI 0.15-0.47, I2 78.2 %). CONCLUSIONS: Fertility preservation treatments offered good long-term reproductive outcomes for women with cancer with a high chance to achieve a live birth. Further research is needed to evaluate the long-term pregnancy and offspring outcomes in this cohort.

Predictive Models for Estimating the Probability of Successful Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all studies that developed or validated a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) prediction model. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until February 2022. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included observational studies that developed or validated a multivariable VBAC prediction model in women with a singleton pregnancy and one previous lower segment cesarean delivery. A total of 3,758 articles were identified and screened. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: For 57 included studies, data were extracted in duplicate using a CHARMS (Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Review of Prediction Modelling Studies) checklist-based tool and included participants' characteristics, sample size, predictors, timing of application, and performance. PROBAST (Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool) and TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) were used to assess risk of bias and transparency of reporting. Several studies developed or validated more than one model. There were 38 unique prediction models, 42 external validations of 10 existing prediction models, and six modifications of existing models. Of the 38 unique models, only 19 (19/38, 50%) were internally validated in the initial study. No studies externally validated their model in the initial study. Age, previous vaginal birth, and previous cesarean delivery for labor dystocia were the commonest predictors. The area under the curve in included studies ranged from 0.61 to 0.95. Models used close to delivery generally outperformed those used earlier in pregnancy. Most studies demonstrated a high risk of bias (45/57, 79%), the remainder were unclear (7/57, 12%) and low (5/57, 9%). Median TRIPOD checklist adherence was 70% (range 32-93%). CONCLUSION: Several prediction models for VBAC success exist, but many lack external validation and are at high risk of bias. Models used close to delivery outperformed those used earlier in pregnancy; however, their generalizability and applicability remain unclear. High-quality external validation and effect studies are required to guide clinical use. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42020190930.

Effectiveness of a web-based virtual journal club to promote medical education (Web-Ed): protocol of a multicentre pragmatic randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: A journal club (JC) is a commonly used medical educational tool. Videoconferencing technology can facilitate the delivery of JCs, however, there remains no evidence on the role of web-based virtual JCs in promoting the acquisition and retention of medical knowledge. The Web-Ed trial aims to evaluate the educational benefits, feasibility and acceptability of web-based virtual JCs compared with traditional face-to-face ones. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Web-Ed is a multicentre pragmatic parallel-group randomised trial across teaching hospitals within the UK National Health Service (NHS). We will enrol qualified doctors or medical students who are >18 years old, proficient in English and able to use online videoconferencing software. Block randomisation will be used to allocate participants in 1:1 ratio to either intervention group. Both groups will be presented with the same educational material and follow a standardised JC structure hosted by nominated moderators and medical faculty members.The primary outcome is the difference in participants' knowledge acquisition and retention 7 days after the JCs evaluated using standardised multiple-choice questions. We will report secondarily on the feasibility and acceptability of the JCs using Likert scale questionnaires. Assuming a 30% drop-out rate, we aim to enrol 75 participants to detect a 20% improvement in knowledge acquisition at 80% power and 5% significance. We will report using mean difference or risk ratio with 95% CIs and assess significance using parametric/non-parametric testing. Where relevant, we will adjust for predetermined characteristics (age, grade of training and session duration) using multivariate regression analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Web-Ed was designed by doctors in training to address their learning needs and evaluate the preferred mode of learning. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant scientific conferences. The trial has been approved by the NHS Health Regulation Authority (21/HRA/3361). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18036769.

Bone and heart health in menopause.

Age at menopause has been shown to have an impact on bone and heart health, with younger menopause age consistently associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, and fracture. These risks are particularly high increased among women who encountering menopause at an early age, including women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) and early menopause, due to a prolonged period of oestrogen deprivation. Several interventions are suggested to optimise the bone and cardiovascular health of women with menopause including lifestyle modification, dietary supplements, hormonal, and non-hormonal therapies. Hormone therapy (HT) is indicated for women with POI. For women with early menopause, there is a paucity of evidence for the management of bone and cardiovascular health. For women beyond the average age of menopause, HT is not indicated solely for bone protection and cardiovascular health. In this group, screening for bone and heart disease, as well as primary and secondary prevention, should be undertaken in line with national and international guidelines.

Interventions to optimize embryo transfer in women undergoing assisted conception: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Several interventions and techniques are suggested to improve the outcome of embryo transfer (ET) in assisted conception. However, there remains no consensus on the optimal practice, with high variations among fertility specialists. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aiming to identify effective interventions that could be introduced around the time of ET to improve reproductive outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL) from inception until March 2021 using a multi-stage search strategy of MeSH terms and keywords, and included all RCTs that evaluated an intervention in the 24-h period before/after ET in women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate post-ET confirmed as viable pregnancy on ultrasound scan. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials and extracted data in duplicate. We pooled data using a random-effect meta-analysis and reported using risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We explored publication bias and effect modifiers using subgroup analyses. OUTCOMES: Our search yielded 3685 citations of which we included 188 RCTs (38 interventions, 59 530 participants) with a median sample size of 200 (range 26-1761). The quality of included RCTs was moderate with most showing a low risk of bias for randomization (118/188, 62.8%) and attrition (105/188, 55.8%) but there was a significant risk of publication bias (Egger's test P = 0.001). Performing ET with ultrasound guidance versus clinical touch (n = 24, RR 1.265, 95% CI 1.151-1.391, I2 = 38.53%), hyaluronic acid versus routine care (n = 9, RR 1.457, 95% CI 1.197-1.261, I2 = 46.48%) and the use of a soft versus hard catheter (n = 27, RR 1.122, 95% CI 1.028-1.224, I2 = 57.66%) led to higher clinical pregnancy rates. Other pharmacological add-ons also showed a beneficial effect including granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF: n = 4, RR 1.774, 95% CI 1.252-2.512, I2 = 0), Atosiban (n = 7, RR 1.493, 95% CI 1.184-1.882, I2 = 68.27%) and hCG (n = 17, RR 1.232, 95% CI 1.099-1.382, I2 = 57.76%). Bed rest following ET was associated with a reduction in clinical pregnancy (n = 6, RR 0.857, 95% CI 0.741-0.991, I2 = 0.01%). Other commonly used interventions, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, prophylactic antibiotics, acupuncture and cervical mucus removal, did not show a significant benefit on reproductive outcomes. Our effect estimates for other important outcomes, including miscarriage and live birth, were limited by the varied reporting across included RCTs. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Using ultrasound guidance, soft catheters and hyaluronic acid at the time of ET appears to increase clinical pregnancy rates. The use of Atosiban, G-CSF and hCG showed a trend towards increased clinical pregnancy rate, but larger trials are required before adopting these interventions in clinical practice. Bed rest post-ET was associated with a reduction in clinical pregnancy and should not be recommended.

Online health information on induction of labour: A systematic review and quality assessment study.

OBJECTIVES: Many women will seek information online about induction of labour. However, the quality of the available information varies greatly and there are no regulations regarding the content that is published. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the quality of online health information on induction of labour. STUDY DESIGN: We established a bespoke search strategy with our public and patient representative using common induction of labour search terms. In January 2021 we used the metasearch engines Dogpile, Duckduckgo and Ecosia to identify relevant websites and additional searches were undertaken using different google platforms. We included all open access websites in English which provided specific advice to women on induction of labour. We assessed the quality of the websites for their credibility, accuracy, readability, and content quality in duplicate. The websites were compared according to their source of funding, target user and whether they were pregnancy specific websites or generic. There was no funding for this project. RESULTS: We screened 2875 websites from the searches. 221 websites were included out of which only 45 (20%) were pregnancy specific and 109 (50%) had governmental funding. Generic websites had higher credibility (median 6.0 vs 5.5; p = 0.031), accuracy (median 10.75 vs 9.5; p = 0.042) and quality scores (median 45.0 vs 40.0; p = 0.036) than pregnancy specific ones. Those with governmental funding had higher quality scores than commercially funded ones for credibility (median 6.5 vs 5.5; p = 0.002), accuracy (median 13.5 vs 9.0; p < 0.000), readability (72.2 vs 61.2; p = 0.001) and quality (51.0 vs 38.5; p=<0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of online health information on induction of labour is varied. Governmental websites seem to offer better quality information to pregnant women awaiting induction of labour.