Effectiveness and safety of menopause treatments: pitfalls of available evidence and future research need.

By 2050 more than 1.6 billion women worldwide will be of post-reproductive age, with >75% reporting severe menopausal symptoms. The last few years saw a gradual uplift in public awareness reaffirming the health needs of women with menopause. Still, effective translation of available evidence on menopause treatments is hindered by several methodological limitations and poor research conduct. We argue that a paradigm shift is required in menopause research to address the remaining knowledge gap and guide safe evidence-based care provision. A critical misconception across studies on menopause is the assumption that women represent a homogeneous group who respond similarly to a particular therapy irrespective of their exposure and individual risk factors. We highlight potential solutions to optimize the quality of future research in menopause including adopting robust trial methodology, standardize outcome reporting to capture quality-of-life measures, and improve lay patient and public involvement in future research.

Lifestyle interventions in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A scoping systematic review of randomised evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Lifestyle interventions (LSI) are recommended as first-line treatment for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), yet the strength of evidence underpinning LSIs effectiveness remains unclear. We systematically reviewed the literature on LSIs in PCOS, evaluated evidence quality and summarised recommendations for clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL for all randomised trials evaluating any LSI in PCOS until April 2021. We extracted data on the LSIs' characteristics, dietary composition, duration, implementation, compliance assessment, and reported outcomes. We evaluated the evidence gap using a network-map of evaluated interventions. RESULTS: We screened 550 citations and included 79 trials (n=4659 women). Most trials were from high-income countries (57/79, 72%) over a decade ago (48/79, 61%) and enrolled obese/overweight women (57/77, 74%). BMI was the commonest reported outcome (58/79, 73%), followed by weight (49/79, 62%), and testosterone (45/79, 57%). More than half of the trials had high-risk of randomisation (51/79, 65%) and allocation bias (49/79, 62%). Only 27 were registered prospectively (27/79, 34%). Two-thirds evaluated a dietary intervention (70/79, 88%), most commonly a hypocaloric diet (32/70, 46%); nineteen evaluated a combined dietary with pharmacological intervention (19/79, 24%), six combined diet with physical or behavioural intervention (6/79, 8%), and only one trial included all four elements. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on LSI in PCOS is of poor quality with high variations in trial design, comparisons, and outcome reporting. Hypocaloric diet is the most commonly recommended LSI intervention for primary care. Future trials are needed to evaluate pragmatic and simple LSIs in robust multicenter studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42020186571.

Comparison of perinatal outcomes for all modes of second stage delivery in obstetric theatres: a retrospective observational study.

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.

Accuracy of imaging modalities for adnexal torsion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adnexal torsion (AT), a serious gynaecological emergency, often presents with non-specific symptoms leading to delayed diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the test accuracy of ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to diagnose AT. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL until December 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies reporting on the accuracy of any imaging modality (Index Test) in female patients (paediatric and adult) suspected of AT compared with surgical diagnosis and/or standard clinical/radiological follow-up period until resolution of symptoms (Reference Standard). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed study quality using QUADAS-2. We conducted test accuracy meta-analysis using a univariate model or a hierarchical model. MAIN RESULTS: We screened 3836 citations, included 18 studies (1654 women, 665 cases), and included 15 in the meta-analyses. Ultrasound pooled sensitivity (n = 12, 1187 women) was 0.79 (95% CI 0.63-0.92) and specificity was 0.76 (95% CI 0.54-0.93), with negative and positive likelihood ratios of 0.29 (95% CI 0.13-0.66) and 4.35 (95% CI 2.03-9.32), respectively. Using Doppler with ultrasound (n = 7, 845 women) yielded similar sensitivity (0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.93) and specificity (0.88, 95% CI 0.72-1.00). For MRI (n = 3, 99 women), the pooled sensitivity was 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-0.91) and specificity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.80-0.96). A meta-analysis for CT was not possible with two case-control studies and one cohort study (n = 3, 232 women). Its sensitivity range was 0.74-0.95 and specificity was 0.80-0.90. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound has good performance as a first-line diagnostic test for suspected AT. Magnetic resonance imaging could offer improved specificity to investigate complex ovarian morphology, but more evidence is needed. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: To investigate adnexal torsion, ultrasound is a good first-line diagnostic test with a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 and specificity of 0.76.

Provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of junior doctors in the UK National Health Service.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is disrupting health services worldwide. We aimed to evaluate the provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services in the UK during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Interview-based national survey. SETTING: Women's healthcare units in the National Health Service. POPULATION: Junior doctors in obstetrics and gynaecology. METHODS: Participants were interviewed by members of the UK Audit and Research in Obstetrics and Gynaecology trainees' collaborative between 28 March and 7 April 2020. We used a quantitative analysis for closed-ended questions and a thematic framework analysis for open comments. RESULTS: We received responses from 148/155 units (95%), most of the participants were in years 3-7 of training (121/148, 82%). Most completed specific training drills for managing obstetric and gynaecological emergencies in women with COVID-19 (89/148, 60.1%) and two-person donning and doffing of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (96/148, 64.9%). The majority of surveyed units implemented COVID-19-specific protocols (130/148, 87.8%), offered adequate PPE (135/148, 91.2%) and operated dedicated COVID-19 emergency theatres (105/148, 70.8%). Most units reduced face-to-face antenatal clinics (117/148, 79.1%) and suspended elective gynaecology services (131/148, 88.5%). The 2-week referral pathway for oncological gynaecology was not affected in half of the units (76/148, 51.4%), but half reported a planned reduction in oncology surgery (82/148, 55.4%). CONCLUSION: The provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services in the UK during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic seems to be in line with current guidelines, but strategic planning is needed to restore routine gynaecology services and ensure safe access to maternity care in the long term. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services during the acute phase of COVID-19 is in line with current guidelines, strategic planning is needed to restore routine services and ensure safe access to care in the long term.