Predicting miscarriage using systemic immune-inflammation index.

AIM: To evaluate the clinical significance of the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) for patients who had miscarriages. MATERIALS: The retrospective study included 709 pregnant women who had a miscarriage (nonviable intrauterine pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation) and 676 women who carried a viable intrauterine pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation-serving as the control group. The study and the control group were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, laboratory test results, and SII values. Furthermore, laboratory test results and SII values were compared between patients in the study group and the control group with a history of genital bleeding (threatened abortion). RESULTS: The mean gestational week of pregnancy was 9.5 ± 3 for the control group and 8.3 ± 2.5 for the study group (p = 0.150). The SII values were higher in the study group than in the control group (p = 0.030). In all participants with a clinical history of genital bleeding, the leukocyte count, neutrophil count, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and SII values were higher in the miscarriage group than the group with viable fetus (p = 0.031, p = 0.003, p = 0.002, p < 0.001). Based on a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the SII cutoff value for miscarriage was 883.95 (109 /L) (62.6% sensitivity, 62% specificity) in patients with a clinical history of threatened abortion. CONCLUSION: High SII values in early pregnancy may be used as an additional marker for the prediction of miscarriage, in pregnant women with threatened abortion. Further prediction models including maternal risk factors and multiple markers may be more valuable for clinical practice.

Performing gynecologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey: A multicenter retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To report the perioperative outcomes of 200 patients with gynecologic cancer who underwent surgery during the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic and the safety of surgical approach. METHODS: Data of patients operated between March 10 and May 20, 2020, were collected retrospectively. Data were statistically analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Statistics for Windows v. SP21.0. RESULTS: Data of 200 patients were included. Their mean age was 56 years. Of the patients, 54% (n=108), 27.5% (n=55), 12.5% (n=25), and 2% (n=4) were diagnosed as having endometrial, ovarian, cervical, and vulvar cancer, respectively. Of them, 98% underwent non-emergent surgery. A minimally invasive surgical approach was used in 18%. Stage 1 cancer was found in 68% of patients. Surgeons reported COVID-related changes in 10% of the cases. The rate of postoperative complications was 12%. Only two patients had cough and suspected pneumonic lesions on thoracic computed tomography postoperatively, but neither was positive for COVID-19 on polymerase chain reaction testing. CONCLUSION: Based on the present findings, it is thought that gynecologic cancer surgery should continue during the COVID-19 pandemic while adhering to the measures. Postponement or non-surgical management should only be considered in patients with documented infection. Gynecologic cancer surgery should continue during the COVID-19 pandemic while adhering to measures. Only 1% of patients developed COVID-19-related symptoms during the postoperative follow-up period.