Predicting Uterine Rupture Risk Using Lower Uterine Segment Measurement During Pregnancy With Cesarean History: How Reliable Is It? A Review.

Importance: Uterine rupture during labor is a calamitous event that can result in maternal/neonatal morbidity/mortality. Lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness measurement is a proposed method to determine the risk factor of uterine rupture in women undergoing trial of labor after cesarean. Does this measurement predict uterine rupture risk? Objectives: This review examines current evidence to determine if a thin LUS ultrasound diagnosis during pregnancy with prior cesarean delivery(s) can reliably predict uterine rupture risk while attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched with one limitation of abstracts in English. Search terms used were "lower uterine segment" AND "risk(s)" AND "rupture" OR "dehiscence. Results: After reviewing 164 identified articles, 15 were used in this review. Of the studies including LUS thickness measurement, notable differences were found: gestational age at time of measurement, full thickness measurement versus myometrial thickness, number of sonographers involved, ultrasound technique (transabdominal vs transvaginal), and blinding. Other factors influencing LUS thickness include fetal weight, amniotic fluid volume, and gestational age. The most recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that an LUS > 3.65 mm should be safe for a VBAC, 2-3.65 mm is probably safe, and <2 mm identifies a patient at higher risk for uterine rupture/dehiscence. Conclusions: Study heterogeneity, absence of an agreed upon thickness threshold, poor correlation between ultrasound and MRI measurements, or physical cesarean measurements currently make VBAC uterine rupture risk prediction uncertain. Relevance: Our aim is to analyze existing literature to determine if evidence supports LUS measurement in women undergoing VBAC after cesarean to determine risk of uterine rupture.

Evolving trends in maternal fetal medicine referrals in a rural state using telemedicine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine maternal fetal medicine (MFM) referral trends in a Medicaid population over time. STUDY DESIGN: Sixteen clinical guidelines and 23 clinical conditions were identified where co-management/consultation with MFM specialist is recommended. Linked Medicaid claims and birth certificate data for 2001-2006 were used to identify pregnancies with these conditions and whether they received co-management/consultation from a MFM specialist. RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2006, there were 108,703 pregnancies with delivery of 110,890 neonates. Forty-five percent had one or more of the conditions identified for co-management/consultation. Overall pregnancies receiving MFM contact remained unchanged at 22.2% in 2001 and 22.1% in 2006. However, face to face contacts decreased from 14.6% (2001) to 8.7% (2006) while telemedicine consults increased from 7.6% (2001) to 13.3% (2006). Health departments were most likely and family practitioners least likely to refer to MFM (p<0.001). Pregnancy complications leading to MFM referrals include cardiac complications, renal disease, systemic disorders, PPROM, suspected fetal abnormalities, and cervical insufficiency. CONCLUSION: Referral of high-risk pregnancies to MFMs varies with the level of expertise at the primary prenatal site. Increased contact between MFMs and local providers increased MFM referrals.

A phase I dose-escalation clinical trial of a peptide-based human papillomavirus therapeutic vaccine with Candida skin test reagent as a novel vaccine adjuvant for treating women with biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3.

PURPOSE: Non-surgical treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 (CIN2/3) are needed as surgical treatments have been shown to double preterm delivery rate. The goal of this study was to demonstrate safety of a human papillomavirus (HPV) therapeutic vaccine called PepCan, which consists of four current good-manufacturing production-grade peptides covering the HPV type 16 E6 protein and Candida skin test reagent as a novel adjuvant. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a single-arm, single-institution, dose-escalation phase I clinical trial, and the patients (n = 24) were women with biopsy-proven CIN2/3. Four injections were administered intradermally every 3 weeks in limbs. Loop electrical excision procedure (LEEP) was performed 12 weeks after the last injection for treatment and histological analysis. Six subjects each were enrolled (50, 100, 250, and 500 µg per peptide). RESULTS: The most common adverse events (AEs) were injection site reactions, and none of the patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities. The best histological response was seen at the 50 µg dose level with a regression rate of 83% (n = 6), and the overall rate was 52% (n = 23). Vaccine-induced immune responses to E6 were detected in 65% of recipients (significantly in 43%). Systemic T-helper type 1 (Th1) cells were significantly increased after four vaccinations (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that PepCan is safe. A significantly increased systemic level of Th1 cells suggests that Candida, which induces interleukin-12 (IL-12) in vitro, may have a Th1 promoting effect. A phase II clinical trial to assess the full effect of this vaccine is warranted.