Bacterial vaginosis in a subfertile population undergoing fertility treatments: a prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: This study investigates the role of bacterial vaginosis (BV) on pregnancy rates during various fertility treatments. BV is known to influence several obstetric outcomes, such as preterm delivery and endometritis. Only few studies investigated the effect of BV in subfertile women, and studies found a negative effect on fecundity especially in the in vitro fertilisation population. METHODS: Observational prospective study, 76 couples attending a fertility clinic in the Netherlands between July 2019 and June 2022, undergoing a total of 133 attempts of intra uterine insemination, in vitro fertilization or intra cytoplasmatic sperm injection. Vaginal samples taken at oocyte retrieval or insemination were analysed on qPCR BV and 16S rRNA gene microbiota analysis of V1-V2 region. Logistic regression with a Generalized Estimated Equations analysis was used to account for multiple observations per couples. RESULTS: A total of 26% of the 133 samples tested positive for BV. No significant differences were observed in ongoing pregnancy or live birth rates based on BV status (OR 0.50 (0.16-1.59), aOR 0.32 (0.09-1.23)) or microbiome community state type. There was a tendency of more miscarriages based on positive BV status (OR 4.22 (1.10-16.21), aOR 4.28 (0.65-28.11)) or community state type group III and IV. On baseline qPCR positive participants had significantly higher body mass index and smoked more often. Odds ratios were adjusted for smoking status, body mass index, and socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION: Bacterial vaginosis does not significantly impact ongoing pregnancy rates but could affect miscarriage rates.

[Hyperthyroidism and an unexpected molar pregnancy]. / Hyperthyreoïdie en een onverwachte molazwangerschap.

BACKGROUND: A molar pregnancy is a rare complication of (non-viable) pregnancy and produces high levels of hCG-hormone. hCG has characteristics similar to TSH, and therefore (severe) hyperthyroidism can occur. The incidence of molar pregnancy is approximately 1 in 1000-1500 pregnancies. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 23-year-old woman had complaints of discomfort, nausea and vomiting. A urine pregnancy test was negative and laboratory tests showed a severe hyperthyroidism. After referral a molar pregnancy was diagnosed (hCG 1.7 million IU/L). She was treated by curettage. hCG levels insufficiently decreased in the following weeks, and gestational trophoblastic neoplasia was diagnosed. She needed several courses of methotrexate after which she completely recovered. CONCLUSION: Severe hyperthyreoidism can be caused by a molar pregnancy. A urine pregnancy test can be negative because of too high hCG-levels, also known as the hook effect. Early recognition and treatment are very important because of the risk of severe complications.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of LESS compared to conventional hysterectomy. METHODS: The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the MOOSE guideline, and quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Different databases were searched up to 4th of August 2016. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing LESS to the conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 668 unique articles, 23 were found relevant. We investigated safety by analyzing the complication rate and found no significant differences between both groups [OR 0.94 (0.61, 1.44), I 2 = 19%]. We assessed effectiveness by analyzing conversion risk, postoperative pain, and patient satisfaction. For conversion rates to laparotomy, no differences were identified [OR 1.60 (0.40, 6.38), I 2 = 45%]. In 3.5% of the cases in the LESS group, an additional port was needed during LESS. For postoperative pain scores and patient satisfaction, some of the included studies reported favorable results for LESS, but the clinical relevance was non-significant. Concerning secondary outcomes, only a difference in operative time was found in favor of the conventional group [MD 11.3 min (5.45-17.17), I 2 = 89%]. The quality of evidence for our primary outcomes was low or very low due to the study designs and lack of power for the specified outcomes. Therefore, caution is urged when interpreting the results. CONCLUSION: The single-port technique for benign hysterectomy is feasible, safe, and equally effective compared to the conventional technique. No clinically relevant advantages were identified, and as no data on cost effectiveness are available, there are currently not enough valid arguments to broadly implement LESS for hysterectomy.