Effect of different antibiotic therapies on the reproductive outcomes of fresh embryo transfer for chronic endometritis: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reproductive outcomes by comparing two kinds of antibiotic schemes for chronic endometritis (CE) in infertile women's fresh embryo transfer (FET) cycles and identify subgroups of patients with CE who need long-term antibiotics treatment. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University-based reproductive medical center. PATIENT(S): A total of 492 women with CD138-positive plasmacytes per 10 high-power fields (CD138+/10HPF). INTERVENTION(S): Hysteroscopy was performed and endometrial biopsy samples were collected in the proliferative phase. Long-term or short-term antibiotics were administrated. After antibiotics treatment, patients underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF)/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and received ET. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, clinical miscarriage rate. RESULT (S): There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes between patients with CD138+/10HPF 1-4 (low-grade CE) who received long-term antibiotic therapy and short-term antibiotics groups. Among women with CD138+/10HPF ≥5 (high-grade CE), live birth rate (48.4% vs. 14.7%, p = .001), clinical pregnancy rate (66.7% vs. 35.3%, p = .002) and ongoing pregnancy rate (59.1% vs. 20.6%, p < .001) in the long-term arm were significantly higher than that in the short-term arm. The clinical miscarriage rate (21.0% vs. 58.3%, p = .013) was statistically lower in the long-term antibiotics group, but no statistical differences were found between the two groups in preterm delivery rate. CONCLUSION: Long-term antibiotics treatment was a sensible choice to improve pregnancy outcomes in women with CD138+/10HPF ≥5 (high-grade CE). The pregnancy outcomes of women with low-grade CE only defined by histological diagnosis were not greatly improved after antibiotic therapy. Therefore, we recommended the proper diagnosis criteria were CD138+/10HPF ≥5 pathologically.

Sarcopenia increases the risk of early biliary infection after percutaneous transhepatic biliary stent placement.

Purpose: To assess the association between sarcopenia and the risk of early biliary infection (EBI) after percutaneous transhepatic biliary stent (PTBS) placement in patients with inoperable biliary tract cancer (BTC). Patients and methods: In this single center, retrospective observational study, patients diagnosed with inoperable BTC undergoing PTBS placement between January 2013 and July 2021 were enrolled. Preoperative sarcopenia was defined based on skeletal muscle mass measured by computed tomography images on the level of third lumbar vertebra within one month before PTBS placement. Patients were divided into two groups in accordance with the status of sarcopenia. Univariate and further multivariate logistic analyses were performed to determine predictors for EBI. Stratified and interactive analyses were conducted to investigate the stability of results. Further receiver operating characteristic curve was performed to determine the predictive value of sarcopenia on EBI after PTBS placement. Results: Totally, 134 patients were included in this retrospective study, with 45 (33.6%) patients characterized as sarcopenia. The incidence rate of EBI was 26.9% (36/134). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that sarcopenia [Odds ratio (OR), 2.75; 95%CI: 1.11-6.77; P=0.028], obstruction length (OR, 1.04; 95%CI: 1.00-1.08; P=0.030) and diabetes (OR, 2.46; 95%CI: 1.01-5.96; P=0.047) were significant predictors of EBI. There were no significant interactions in different subgroups (P for interaction > 0.05). Moreover, the areas under the curves (AUC) revealed that the combined index containing sarcopenia, obstruction length, and diabetes showed the better predictive value (AUC= 0.723) than either one alone. Conclusion: Sarcopenia increased the risk of EBI in patients with inoperable BTC after PTBS placement. Preoperative assessment of sarcopenia may aid in risk stratification. Patients with sarcopenia should be given intensive monitoring.

Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic pancreas resections: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreatic resection has been shown recently in some randomized trials to be superior in selected perioperative outcomes compared with open resection when performed by experienced surgeons. However, minimally invasive pancreatic resection is associated with a long learning curve. This study aims to summarize the current evidence on the learning curve of minimally invasive pancreatic resection and define the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane database using a detailed search strategy. Studies that did not describe the learning curve were excluded from the study. Data on the method of learning curve analysis, single surgeon versus institutional learning curve, and outcome measures were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies were included in the pooled analysis: 12 on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, 9 on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, 12 on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, and 3 on robotic distal pancreatectomy. Sample population was comparable between laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (median 63 vs 65). Six of 12 studies and 7 of 9 studies used nonarbitrary methods of analysis in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Operating time was used as the single outcome measure in 4 of 12 studies in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and 5 of 9 studies in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Overall, there was no significant difference between the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy 34.1 [95% confidence interval 30.7-37.7] versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy 36.7 [95% confidence interval 32.9-41.0]; P = .8241) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy 25.3 [95% confidence interval 22.5-28.3] versus robotic distal pancreatectomy 20.7 [95% confidence interval 15.8-26.5]; P = .5997.) CONCLUSION: This study provides a detailed summary of existing evidence around the learning curve in minimally invasive pancreatic resection. There was no significant difference between the learning curve for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. These findings were limited by the retrospective nature and heterogeneity of the studies published to date.