What is the applicability of tubal ligation with the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery technique and its value in patient comfort?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to observe the feasibility of the tubal/adnexal approach using vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and compare its contribution with surgeon ergonomics and postoperative patient comfort with that of conventional laparoscopy. METHODS: We completed this study retrospectively with 47 patients. Patients were followed at their postoperative first month. We analyzed the usability of the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery method over conventional laparoscopy by comparing the demographics, surgical data, and postoperative findings collected between the two groups. RESULTS: Patients in the conventional laparoscopy group were older (39.1±3.3 years) than those in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery patient group (p=0.005). Pain intensity 24 h after surgery was lower in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery group (p=0.003), while sexual function and dyspareunia did not differ between the two groups in the first month. Patients in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery group were more relieved about painlessness and the comfort it brought than the conventional laparoscopy group (p=0.027, χ2=12.56). CONCLUSION: Patients subjected to the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery procedure showed higher levels of satisfaction, less postoperative pain, and greater comfort than those subjected to conventional laparoscopy.

What is the applicability of tubal ligation with the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery technique and its value in patient comfort?

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to observe the feasibility of the tubal/adnexal approach using vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and compare its contribution with surgeon ergonomics and postoperative patient comfort with that of conventional laparoscopy. METHODS: We completed this study retrospectively with 47 patients. Patients were followed at their postoperative first month. We analyzed the usability of the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery method over conventional laparoscopy by comparing the demographics, surgical data, and postoperative findings collected between the two groups. RESULTS: Patients in the conventional laparoscopy group were older (39.1±3.3 years) than those in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery patient group (p=0.005). Pain intensity 24 h after surgery was lower in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery group (p=0.003), while sexual function and dyspareunia did not differ between the two groups in the first month. Patients in the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery group were more relieved about painlessness and the comfort it brought than the conventional laparoscopy group (p=0.027, χ2=12.56). CONCLUSION: Patients subjected to the vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery procedure showed higher levels of satisfaction, less postoperative pain, and greater comfort than those subjected to conventional laparoscopy.

CoronaVac vaccine does not affect ovarian reserve.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, our aim is to investigate the effect of CoronaVac vaccine on ovarian reserve in female patients followed up for infertility. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our study is a retrospective study. Forty-six infertile patients who received two doses of CoronaVac vaccine one month apart and had not had a previous Covid 19 infection were included in the study. Anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) and folliculometry of 46 patients one month before CoronaVac vaccine and one month after the second dose of vaccine were compared. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the change of AMH level and follicle number before and after vaccination (respectively p = 0.366; 0.610). CONCLUSIONS: Considering that having a COVID-19 infection has a negative effect on female fertility and causing ovarian damage in recent studies, vaccination is a rational and cost-effective approach to protect ovarian reserve. Knowing that the vaccine does not have a negative effect on fertility may increase the application of the vaccine in women of reproductive age.

Early Initiation and Long-Term Use of Vaginal Progesterone may Cause Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth (PTB) is an important cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Spontaneous PTB (sPTB) is the most common cause of PTB. In patients with a singleton pregnancy, progesterone treatment appears to reduce the rate of spontaneous preterm birth in those with a previous history of spontaneous preterm labor and/or cervical shortening in the current pregnancy. Progesterone therapies used for the prevention of sPTB may increase the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) towards the end of pregnancy owing to their effects on carbohydrate metabolism. AIM: We aimed to show the effects of vaginal progesterone use, starting time, and duration of treatment on GDM. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was carried out in pregnant women 18 to 39 years old who came to our hospital between January 1, 2021, and August 31, 2021, and who had a 2-hour 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation. In a total of 540 patients, 68 were diagnosed with GDM based on at least one abnormal plasma glucose value at screening. The remaining 472 patients with normal plasma glucose levels were considered as the control group. The groups were compared in terms of age, parity, pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI), smoking, gestational age, and vaginal progesterone use. Patients using vaginal progesterone with and without GDM were then compared again in terms of indications for vaginal progesterone use, initiation time of progesterone therapy, duration of progesterone use, and cervical length. RESULTS: The incidence of GDM in our study group was 12.5%. Despite the use of vaginal progesterone at a higher rate in the GDM group than in the control group (23.5 vs. 13.9%; p=0.07), it was not statistically significant. When we examined patients using progesterone as a subgroup analysis, the mean time to start vaginal progesterone treatment was 19.8±2.6 (14-24), and it was significantly earlier in the GDM group (18.1±2.0 vs. 20.2±2.6; p=0.007). Initiation of vaginal progesterone before 20 weeks of gestation was statistically significantly more frequent in the GDM group than the control group (68.8 vs. 39.4%; p=0.050 OR :3.3, 95%CI: 1.0-10.8). The mean duration of vaginal progesterone use was 50.0±15.6 days (28-90) and it was longer in the GDM group (57.8±13.4 vs. 48.1±15.6; p=0.027). CONCLUSION: Since the duration of vaginal progesterone use will be prolonged, there may be a risk of GDM, especially in patients who started vaginal progesterone before the 20th week of pregnancy. Even if the OGTT test performed between 24-28 weeks is normal, it should be kept in mind that these patients may have GDM in the later weeks of pregnancy, and repeating the OGTT test should be considered if necessary.