Association between Endometriosis and the Risk of Ovarian, Endometrial, Cervical, and Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study from the U.S. National Inpatient Sample 2016-2019.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the potential relationship between endometriosis and risk of ovarian, endometrial, cervical, and breast cancers using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. METHODS: We utilized the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) system to identify relevant codes from the NIS database (2016-2019). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses (adjusted for age, race, hospital region, hospital teaching status, income Zip score, smoking, alcohol use, and hormonal replacement therapy) were conducted to evaluate the association between endometriosis and gynecologic cancers and summarized as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In the examined dataset, there were 1164 and 225,323 gynecologic cancer patients with and without endometriosis, respectively. Univariate analysis showed endometriosis was significantly associated with a higher risk of ovarian (OR = 3.42, 95% CI: 3.05-3.84, p < 0.001) and endometrial (OR = 3.35, 95% CI: 2.97-3.79, p < 0.001) cancers. There was no significant association between endometriosis and cervical cancer (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.85-1.28, p = 0.663). Interestingly, endometriosis was significantly associated with a low risk of breast cancer (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.10-0.17, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.006) showed that endometriosis was significantly associated with a high risk of ovarian (adjusted OR = 3.34, 95% CI: 2.97-3.75, p < 0.001) and endometrial (adjusted OR = 3.61, 95% CI: 3.12-4.08, p < 0.001) cancers. Conversely, there was no significant association between endometriosis and cervical cancer (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with endometriosis exhibited unique gynecologic cancer risk profiles, with higher risks for ovarian and endometrial cancers, and no significant risk for cervical cancer. The observed connection between endometriosis and a reduced risk of breast cancer remains a perplexing phenomenon, which cannot be put into context to date.

Tranexamic acid versus misoprostol for management of postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIM: To conduct the first-ever systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the antihemorrhagic utility and safety of tranexamic acid (TXA) versus misoprostol for management (prevention and/or treatment) of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). METHODS: Six databases were screened from inception until May 2023 and updated in September 2023. The RCTs were assessed for quality according to the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The endpoints were summarized as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model. RESULTS: Ten RCTs with 2121 patients (TXA = 1061 and misoprostol = 1060) were analyzed. There was no significant difference between TXA and misoprostol groups regarding the mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 9 RCTs, MD = 17.32 ml, 95% CI [-40.43, 75.07], p = 0.56), mean change in hemoglobin (n = 6 RCTs, MD = 0.11 mg/dl, 95% CI [-0.1, 0.31], p = 0.30), mean hospital stay (n = 2 RCTs, MD = -0.3 day, 95% CI [-0.61, 0.01], p = 0.06), blood transfusion rate (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.16, 1.47], p = 0.2), and rate of additional uterotonic agents (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 1.05, 95% CI [0.72, 1.53], p = 0.81). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis showed robustness of the results, and there was no evidence of publication bias. Regarding safety endpoints, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the rates of minor side effects, such as diarrhea, fever, nausea, and vomiting. No patient developed thromboembolic events in the TXA group. CONCLUSION: There was no significant antihemorrhagic efficacy between adjunct TXA and misoprostol for the management of PPH. The safety profile was comparable between both agents.

Cardiovascular Mortality in Ovarian Cancer Patients: An Analysis of Patient Characteristics Using the SEER Database.

Background and Objectives: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major contributor to the high mortality rate among individuals with ovarian cancer. Nevertheless, there is limited understanding regarding the specific patient attributes that might impact the risk of CVD in this group. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the SEER database to analyze primary ovarian cancer cases from 2000 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was employed to identify patient characteristics linked to cardiovascular mortality. Results: The cohort included 41,930 cases of patients who were alive, 54,829 cases of cancer-related deaths, 3003 cases of cardiovascular-related deaths, and 10,238 cases with other causes of death. Poorly differentiated cancer cells and distant metastasis were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular mortality. Logistic regression analysis identified age, year of diagnosis, race, laterality, and staging as significant risk factors for cardiovascular cause of death. The risk of cardiovascular cause of death was lower in patients aged 31-60 and higher in those aged over 60 years old, and the risk also increased with a later year of diagnosis. Patients who were not white were at a higher risk of cardiovascular cause of death. Additionally, bilateral ovarian cancer and distant staging disease were linked to elevated risks of cardiovascular cause of death. Conclusion: Cardiovascular mortality is a significant concern in ovarian cancer patients, and several patient characteristics are associated with an increased risk. Our study suggests that targeted interventions to improve cardiovascular health in high-risk patients, such as those with comorbidities or an advanced stage at diagnosis, may improve survival in this population.

Prophylactic vasopressin to reduce intraoperative blood loss and associated morbidities during myomectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To collate evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled trials (NCTs) on the efficacy and safety of vasopressin versus passive control (placebo/no treatment) during myomectomy. METHODS: Six information sources were screened until 25-June-2022. The Cochrane Collaboration tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the risk of bias. Data were summarized as mean difference or risk ratio with 95% confidence interval in a random-effects model. RESULTS: Eleven studies, comprising 1067 patients (vasopressin=567 and control=500) were analyzed. For RCTs (n = 8), the overall quality included 'high risk' (n = 4), 'low risk' (n = 2), and 'some concerns' (n = 2). For NCTs (n = 3), the overall quality included 'good' (n = 2) and 'fair' (n = 1). The mean intraoperative blood loss, mean difference in hemoglobin level, mean difference in hematocrit level, rate of perioperative blood transfusion, and mean operative time were significantly reduced in favor of the vasopressin group compared with the control group. However, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the mean hospital stay. Pertaining to safety endpoints, after omission of an outlier study, the rate of drug-related cardiovascular adverse events did not significantly differ between both groups. There was no quantitative evidence of publication bias for the endpoint of intraoperative blood loss. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing myomectomy, prophylactic administration of vasopressin was largely safe and correlated with significant reductions in intraoperative blood loss and associated morbidities compared with a passive control intervention. Nonetheless, the conclusions should be cautiously interpreted owing to the low-evidence quality and the used doses varied greatly between studies.

Prophylactic tranexamic acid to reduce blood loss and related morbidities during hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of prophylactic tranexamic acid (TXA) versus a control (placebo or no treatment) during hysterectomy for benign conditions. Six databases were screened from inception to January 23, 2022. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Outcomes were summarized as weighted mean differences and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals in a random-effects model. Five studies, comprising six arms and 911 patients were included in the study. Two and three studies had an overall unclear and low risk of bias, respectively. Estimated intraoperative blood loss, requirement for postoperative blood transfusion, and requirement for intraoperative topical hemostatic agents were significantly reduced in a prophylactic TXA group when compared with a control group. Moreover, postoperative hemoglobin level was significantly higher in the prophylactic TXA group than in the control group. Conversely, the frequency of self-limiting nausea and vomiting was significantly higher in the prophylactic TXA group than in the control group. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of surgery duration, hospital stay, and diarrhea rate. All the RCTs reported no incidence of major adverse events in either group, such as mortality, thromboembolic events, visual disturbances, or seizures. There was no publication bias for any outcome, and leave-one-out sensitivity analyses demonstrated stability of the findings. Among patients who underwent hysterectomy for benign conditions, prophylactic TXA appeared largely safe and correlated with substantial reductions in estimated intraoperative blood loss and related morbidities.