Definition and sonographic reporting system for Cesarean scar pregnancy in early gestation: modified Delphi method.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardized sonographic evaluation and reporting system for Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) in the first trimester, for use by both general gynecology and expert clinics. METHODS: A modified Delphi procedure was carried out, in which 28 international experts in obstetric and gynecological ultrasonography were invited to participate. Extensive experience in the use of ultrasound to evaluate Cesarean section (CS) scars in early pregnancy and/or publications concerning CSP or niche evaluation was required to participate. Relevant items for the detection and evaluation of CSP were determined based on the results of a literature search. Consensus was predefined as a level of agreement of at least 70% for each item, and a minimum of three Delphi rounds were planned (two online questionnaires and one group meeting). RESULTS: Sixteen experts participated in the Delphi study and four Delphi rounds were performed. In total, 58 items were determined to be relevant. We differentiated between basic measurements to be performed in general practice and advanced measurements for expert centers or for research purposes. The panel also formulated advice on indications for referral to an expert clinic. Consensus was reached for all 58 items on the definition, terminology, relevant items for evaluation and reporting of CSP. It was recommended that the first CS scar evaluation to determine the location of the pregnancy should be performed at 6-7 weeks' gestation using transvaginal ultrasound. The use of magnetic resonance imaging was not considered to add value in the diagnosis of CSP. A CSP was defined as a pregnancy with implantation in, or in close contact with, the niche. The experts agreed that a CSP can occur only when a niche is present and not in relation to a healed CS scar. Relevant sonographic items to record included gestational sac (GS) size, vascularity, location in relation to the uterine vessels, thickness of the residual myometrium and location of the pregnancy in relation to the uterine cavity and serosa. According to its location, a CSP can be classified as: (1) CSP in which the largest part of the GS protrudes towards the uterine cavity; (2) CSP in which the largest part of the GS is embedded in the myometrium but does not cross the serosal contour; and (3) CSP in which the GS is partially located beyond the outer contour of the cervix or uterus. The type of CSP may change with advancing gestation. Future studies are needed to validate this reporting system and the value of the different CSP types. CONCLUSION: Consensus was achieved among experts regarding the sonographic evaluation and reporting of CSP in the first trimester. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Aetiology, risk factors and preventive strategies for niche development: A review.

The increase in caesarean sections (CS) has resulted in an increase in women with a uterine niche. The exact aetiology of niche development has yet to be elucidated but is likely multifactorial. This study aimed to give a systematic overview of the available literature on histopathological features, risk factors and results of preventive strategies on niche development to gain more insight into the underlying mechanisms. Based on current published data histopathological findings associated with niche development were necrosis, fibrosis, inflammation, adenomyosis and insufficient approximation. Patient-related risk factors included multiple CS, BMI and smoking. Labour-related factors were CS before onset of labour, extended cervical dilatation, premature rupture of membranes and presenting part of the fetus at CS below the pelvic inlet. Preventive strategies should focus on the optimal level of incision, training of surgeons and full-thickness closure of the myometrium (single or double-layer) using non-locking sutures. Conflicting data exist concerning the effect of endometrial inclusion. Future studies without heterogeneity in population, using standardized performance of the CS after proper training and using standardized niche evaluation with a relevant core outcome set are required to allow meta-analyses and to develop evidence-based preventive strategies. These studies are needed to reduce the prevalence of niches and prevent complications in subsequent pregnancies such as caesarean scar pregnancies.

A randomized controlled trial on the benefits and respiratory adverse effects of morphine for refractory dyspnea in patients with COPD: Protocol of the MORDYC study.

Dyspnea is one of the most reported symptoms of patients with advanced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and is often undertreated. Morphine has proven to be an effective treatment for dyspnea and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines, but questions concerning benefits and respiratory adverse effects remain. This study primarily evaluates the impact of oral sustained release morphine (morphine SR) on health-related quality of life and respiratory adverse effects in patients with COPD. Secondary objectives include the impact on exercise capacity, the relationship between description and severity of dyspnea and the presence of a clinically relevant response to morphine, and cost-effectiveness. A single-center, randomized, double blind, placebo controlled intervention study will be performed in 124 patients with COPD who recently completed a comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation program. Participants will receive 20-30 mg/24h morphine SR or placebo for four weeks. After the intervention, participants will be followed for twelve weeks. Outcomes include: the COPD Assessment Test, six minute walking test, Multidimensional Dyspnea Scale and a cost diary. Furthermore, lung function and arterial blood gasses will be measured. These measures will be assessed during a baseline and outcome assessment, two home visits, two phone calls, and three follow-up assessments. The intervention and control group will be compared using uni- and multivariate regression analysis and logistic regression analysis. Finally, an economic evaluation will be performed from a societal and healthcare perspective. The current manuscript describes the rationale and methods of this study and provides an outline of the possible strengths, weaknesses and clinical consequences.