RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The surgical technique for uterine closure following cesarean section influences the healing of the cesarean scar; however, there is still no consensus on the optimal technique regarding the closure of the endometrium layer. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of closure versus non-closure of the endometrium during cesarean section on the risk to develop uterine scar defect and associated symptoms. METHODS: A randomized prospective study was conducted of women undergoing first elective cesarean section at a single tertiary medical center. Exclusion criteria included previous uterine scar, preterm delivery and dysmorphic uterus. Women were randomized for endometrial layer closure versus non-closure. Six months following surgery, women were invited to the ambulatory gynecological clinic for follow-up visit. 2-D transvaginal ultrasound examination was performed to evaluate the cesarean scar characteristics. In addition, women were evaluated for symptoms that might be associated with uterine scar defect. Primary outcome was defined as the residual myometrial thickness (RMT) at the uterine cesarean scar. Data are presented as median and interquartile range. RESULTS: 130 women were recruited to the study, of them follow-up was achieved in 113 (86.9%). 61 (54%) vs. 52 (46%) of the women were included in the endometrial closure vs. non-closure groups, respectively. Groups were comparable for patient's demographic, clinical characteristics and follow-up time for postoperative evaluation. Median RMT was 5.3 (3.0-7.7) vs. 4.6 (3.0-6.5) mm for the endometrial closure and non-closure groups, respectively (p = 0.38). Substantially low RMT (< 2.5 mm) was measured in four (6.6%) women in the endometrial closure group and three (5.8%) of the women in the non-closure group (p = 0.86). All other uterine scar sonographic measurements, as well as dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain and intermenstrual bleeding rates were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION: Closure versus non-closure of the endometrial layer during cesarean uterine incision repair has no significant difference in cesarean scar characteristics and symptom rates at 6 months follow-up.
Asunto(s)
Cesárea , Cicatriz , Recién Nacido , Femenino , Embarazo , Humanos , Cesárea/efectos adversos , Cesárea/métodos , Cicatriz/complicaciones , Cicatriz/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Prospectivos , Útero/diagnóstico por imagen , Útero/cirugía , Endometrio/diagnóstico por imagen , Endometrio/cirugía , Ultrasonografía/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data regarding the management of adnexal torsion (AT) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To study the effects of actions to limit the spread of COVID-19 on AT management. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all women who underwent laparoscopy for suspected AT between March 2011 and February 2021. We compared the COVID-19 pandemic period, (15 March 2020-2 August 2021, group A) to a parallel period (2019-2020, group B), and a 9-year period preceding the pandemic (March 2011-February 2020, group C). RESULTS: We performed 97 laparoscopies in group A, 82 in group B, and 635 in group C. The proportion of women presenting following in vitro fertilization treatment was lower (odds ratio [OR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval ]95%CI] (0.06-0.86), P < 0.023). Time from admission to decision to operate was shorter (2.7 vs. 3.9 hours, P = 0.028) in group A than group B. Time from admission to surgery was shorter (9.1 vs. 12.5 hours, P = 0.005) and the rate of surgically confirmed AT was lower (59 [60.8%] vs. 455 [71.7%], P = 0.030, OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.39-0.95) in group A than group C. Among surgically confirmed AT cases only, mean time from admission to decision was shorter in group A than group B (2.6 vs. 4.6 hours, P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: We identified differences in time from admission to clinical decision and from admission to surgery among women with suspected AT during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades de los Anexos , COVID-19 , Laparoscopía , Tiempo de Tratamiento , Humanos , Femenino , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto , Enfermedades de los Anexos/cirugía , Enfermedades de los Anexos/epidemiología , Laparoscopía/métodos , Tiempo de Tratamiento/estadística & datos numéricos , Israel/epidemiología , Torsión Ovárica/cirugía , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
This study's aim is to describe the imaging findings in pregnant patients undergoing emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis, and the various alternative diagnoses seen on those MRI scans. This is a single center retrospective analysis in which we assessed the imaging, clinical and pathological data for all consecutive pregnant patients who underwent emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis between April 2013 and June 2021. Out of 167 patients, 35 patients (20.9%) were diagnosed with acute appendicitis on MRI. Thirty patients (18%) were diagnosed with an alternative diagnosis on MRI: 17/30 (56.7%) patients had a gynecological source of abdominal pain (e.g. ectopic pregnancy, red degeneration of a leiomyoma); 8 patients (26.7%) had urological findings such as pyelonephritis; and 6 patients (20%) had gastrointestinal diagnoses (e.g. abdominal wall hernia or inflammatory bowel disease). Our conclusions are that MRI is a good diagnostic tool in the pregnant patient, not only in diagnosing acute appendicitis, but also in providing information on alternative diagnoses to acute abdominal pain. Our findings show the various differential diagnoses on emergent MRI in pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis, which may assist clinicians and radiologists is patient assessment and imaging utilization.
Asunto(s)
Apendicitis , Complicaciones del Embarazo , Embarazo , Femenino , Humanos , Apendicitis/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Complicaciones del Embarazo/diagnóstico por imagen , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Dolor Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Enfermedad Aguda , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare 24-hour and 12-hour mifepristone-to-misoprostol intervals for second-trimester medication abortion. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial. Participants were allocated to receive mifepristone either 24 hours or 12 hours before misoprostol administration. The primary outcome was the time from the first misoprostol administration to abortion (induction time). Secondary outcomes included the time from mifepristone to abortion (total abortion time); fetal expulsion percentages at 12, 24, and 48 hours after the first misoprostol dose; side effects proportion; and pain and satisfaction scores. A sample size of 40 per group (N=80) was planned to compare the 24- and 12-hour regimens. RESULTS: Eighty patients were enrolled between July 2020 and June 2023, with 40 patients per group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Median induction time was 9.5 hours (95% CI, 10.3-17.8 hours) and 12.5 hours (95% CI, 13.5-20.2 hours) in the 24- and 12-hour interval arms, respectively ( P =.028). Median total abortion time was 33.0 hours (95% CI, 34.2-41.9 hours) and 24.5 hours (95% CI, 25.7-32.4 hours) in the 24- and 12-hour interval groups, respectively ( P <.001). At 12 hours from misoprostol administration, 25 patients (62.5%) in the 24-hour arm and 18 patients (45.0%) in the 12-hour arm completed abortion ( P =.178). At 24 hours from misoprostol administration, 36 patients (90.0%) in the 24-hour arm and 30 patients (75.0%) in the 12-hour arm had complete abortion ( P =.139). The need for additional medication or surgical treatment for uterine evacuation, pain scores, side effects, and satisfaction levels were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: A 24-hour mifepristone-to-misoprostol regimen for medication abortion in the second trimester provides a median 3-hour shorter induction time compared with the 12-hour interval. However, the median total abortion time was 8.5-hours longer in the 24-hour interval regimen. These findings can aid in shared decision making before medication abortion in the second trimester. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04160221.
Asunto(s)
Aborto Inducido , Esquema de Medicación , Mifepristona , Misoprostol , Segundo Trimestre del Embarazo , Humanos , Femenino , Misoprostol/administración & dosificación , Mifepristona/administración & dosificación , Embarazo , Aborto Inducido/métodos , Adulto , Estudios Prospectivos , Abortivos no Esteroideos/administración & dosificación , Adulto Joven , Factores de Tiempo , Abortivos Esteroideos/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefit of surgical management of patients with endometriosis infiltrating pelvic nerves in terms of pain, analgesic consumption, and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study In an Endometriosis referral center at a tertiary care university affiliated medical center. Patients diagnosed with endometriosis that underwent laparoscopic neurolysis for chronic pain were included. Patients rated their pain before and after surgery and differentiated between chronic pain and acute crises. Patients were requested to maintain a record of analgesic consumption and to evaluate their quality-of-life (QOL). RESULTS: Of the 21 patients in our study 15 (71.5 %) had obturator nerve involvement, 2 (9.5 %) had pudendal nerve involvement and 4 (19 %) had other pelvic nerve involvement. Median postoperative follow - up was of 8 months. All but 2 patients (9.6 %) had significant chronic pain improvement with a mean decrease of VAS of 3.05 (±2.5). Analgesic habits changed postoperatively with a significant decrease of 66 % of patients' daily consumption of any analgesics. Surgery improved QOL in 12 cases (57.1 %) and two patients (9.6 %) completely recovered with a high QOL. CONCLUSION: Neurolysis and excision of endometriosis of pelvic nerves could results in significant improvement of quality of life.