ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of vaginal delivery and adverse outcomes of instrumental delivery trials in obstetric theatre compared to primary emergency full dilation caesarean section. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University teaching hospital. POPULATION: Women with singleton, non-anomalous, pregnancy undergoing instrumental delivery trial in obstetric theatre. METHODS: Data were collected from consecutive cases during 2014 until 2018 using clinical records. Multivariate regression analysis was used comparing outcomes per first delivery method. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was completion of vaginal delivery between all methods of instrumental delivery. Secondary outcome was a composite of immediate perinatal adverse outcomes for instrumental delivery modes and primary full dilation caesarean section. RESULTS: From 971 deliveries analysed: ventouse delivery was significantly less likely to achieve vaginal delivery compared with Keilland's forceps delivery (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.79). Once confounding factors were adjusted for, adverse outcome rates were less frequent in the Keilland's forceps group than with primary full dilation caesarean section (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.81); however, the receiver operating characteristic curve produced from this model demonstrated a low predictive value (AUC 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Attempting instrumental delivery in delivery suite theatre, as an alternative to primary emergency full dilation caesarean section, is both reasonable and safe. In this study, ventouse delivery performed poorly in comparison with other modes of instrumental delivery. Further research in the form of randomised controlled trials to identify the optimal mode of second stage delivery is paramount. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Instrumental delivery trials in theatre are safe but use of ventouse was associated with a higher rate of failure.
Subject(s)
Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Labor Stage, Second , Obstetrical Forceps/adverse effects , Vacuum Extraction, Obstetrical/adverse effects , Adult , Apgar Score , Cohort Studies , Delivery, Obstetric , Female , Humans , Perineum/injuries , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , United KingdomABSTRACT
An accurate prognostic method for preterm birth (PTB) could avoid unnecessary treatment(s) with potentially negative effects. The objective was to explore the prognostic accuracy of commercially available bedside cervicovaginal biomarker tests in combination with cervical length (CL) compared to CL measurement alone and/or a biomarker test alone, for PTB within 7 days after testing symptomatic women at 22-34 weeks. The MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 28th, 2019. Seven hundred and eight articles were identified and screened using Rayyan. Studies reporting on the predictive accuracy of combined tests compared to CL or biomarker alone for the prediction of PTB within 7 days of testing in symptomatic women with intact membranes were included. A piloted data extraction form was used. Direct comparisons of the prognostic accuracy of the combination test with CL measurement or a biomarker alone were done, as well as comparisons of prognostic accuracy of the included combination tests (indirect comparisons). Twelve articles were included (seven on fetal fibronectin, four on phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1, one comparing both). A variety of CL cut-offs was reported. The results could not demonstrate superiority of a combination method compared to single methods. Due to data scarcity and quality, the superiority of either predictive test for PTB, either combination or single, cannot be demonstrated with this systematic review. We recommend further research to compare available biomarkers.
Subject(s)
Obstetric Labor, Premature , Premature Birth , Biomarkers , Cervical Length Measurement , Cervix Uteri/diagnostic imaging , Female , Fibronectins , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Predictive Value of Tests , Pregnancy , Premature Birth/diagnosisABSTRACT
Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma is a rare tumour with orbital involvement being an exceptional occurrence. We present a case of a 22-year old man with such disease, together with details of his management. A brief literature review of this uncommon tumour was also enclosed.