Surgical evacuation combined with Shirodkar cervical suture and selective uterine artery embolization: A fertility preserving treatment for 10-15 weeks' live cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies.

INTRODUCTION: Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies (CSEPs) are associated with significant maternal morbidity and termination is often recommended in the early first trimester. Management of more advanced cases is challenging due to higher risks of major intraoperative hemorrhage. Hysterectomy is currently the intervention of choice for advanced cases. This study aimed to investigate if advanced live CSEPs could be managed effectively conservatively using suction curettage and interventional radiology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort study was performed. A total of 371 women diagnosed with CSEP were identified between January 2008 and January 2023. A total of 6% (22/371) women had an advanced live CSEP with crown-rump length (CRL) of ≥40 mm (≥10 weeks' gestation). Of these, 77% (17/22) opted for surgical intervention, whilst the remaining five continued their pregnancies. A preoperative ultrasound was performed in each patient. All women underwent suction curettage under ultrasound guidance and insertion of Shirodkar cervical suture as a primary hemostatic measure combined with uterine artery embolization (UAE) if required. The primary outcome was rate of blood transfusion. Secondary outcomes were estimated intraoperative blood loss, UAE, intensive care unit admission, reintervention, hysterectomy, hospitalization duration and rate of retained products of conception. Descriptive statistics were used to describe these variables. RESULTS: Median CRL of the 17 patients included was 54.1 mm (range: 40.0-85.7) and median gestational age based on CRL was 12 + 3 weeks (range: 10 + 6-15 + 0). On preoperative ultrasound scan placental lacunae were recorded in 76% (13/17) of patients and color Doppler score was ≥3 in 67% (10/15) of patients. At surgery, Shirodkar cervical suture was used in all cases. It was successful in achieving hemostasis by tamponade in 76% (13/17) of patients. In the remaining 24% (4/17) patients tamponade failed to achieve complete hemostasis and UAE was performed to stop persistent arterial bleeding into the uterine cavity. Median intraoperative blood loss was 800 mL (range: 250-2500) and 41% (7/17) women lost >1000 mL. 35% (6/17) needed blood transfusion. No women required hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical evacuation with Shirodkar cervical suture and selective UAE is an effective treatment for advanced live CSEPs.

Mifepristone and misoprostol versus placebo and misoprostol for resolution of miscarriage in women diagnosed with missed miscarriage: the MifeMiso RCT.

TRIAL DESIGN: A randomised, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study with health economic and nested qualitative studies to determine if mifepristone (Mifegyne®, Exelgyn, Paris, France) plus misoprostol is superior to misoprostol alone for the resolution of missed miscarriage. METHODS: Women diagnosed with missed miscarriage in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy were randomly assigned (1 : 1 ratio) to receive 200 mg of oral mifepristone or matched placebo, followed by 800 µg of misoprostol 2 days later. A web-based randomisation system allocated the women to the two groups, with minimisation for age, body mass index, parity, gestational age, amount of bleeding and randomising centre. The primary outcome was failure to pass the gestational sac within 7 days after randomisation. The prespecified key secondary outcome was requirement for surgery to resolve the miscarriage. A within-trial cost-effectiveness study and a nested qualitative study were also conducted. Women who completed the trial protocol were purposively approached to take part in an interview to explore their satisfaction with and the acceptability of medical management of missed miscarriage. RESULTS: A total of 711 women, from 28 hospitals in the UK, were randomised to receive either mifepristone plus misoprostol (357 women) or placebo plus misoprostol (354 women). The follow-up rate for the primary outcome was 98% (696 out of 711 women). The risk of failure to pass the gestational sac within 7 days was 17% (59 out of 348 women) in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group, compared with 24% (82 out of 348 women) in the placebo plus misoprostol group (risk ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.98; p = 0.04). Surgical intervention to resolve the miscarriage was needed in 17% (62 out of 355 women) in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group, compared with 25% (87 out of 353 women) in the placebo plus misoprostol group (risk ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.52 to 0.94; p = 0.02). There was no evidence of a difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. A total of 42 women, 19 in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group and 23 in the placebo plus misoprostol group, took part in an interview. Women appeared to have a preference for active management of their miscarriage. Overall, when women experienced care that supported their psychological well-being throughout the care pathway, and information was delivered in a skilled and sensitive manner such that women felt informed and in control, they were more likely to express satisfaction with medical management. The use of mifepristone and misoprostol showed an absolute effect difference of 6.6% (95% confidence interval 0.7% to 12.5%). The average cost per woman was lower in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group, with a cost saving of £182 (95% confidence interval £26 to £338). Therefore, the use of mifepristone and misoprostol for the medical management of a missed miscarriage dominated the use of misoprostol alone. LIMITATIONS: The results from this trial are not generalisable to women diagnosed with incomplete miscarriage and the study does not allow for a comparison with expectant or surgical management of miscarriage. FUTURE WORK: Future work should use existing data to assess and rank the relative clinical effectiveness and safety profiles for all methods of management of miscarriage. CONCLUSIONS: Our trial showed that pre-treatment with mifepristone followed by misoprostol resulted in a higher rate of resolution of missed miscarriage than misoprostol treatment alone. Women were largely satisfied with medical management of missed miscarriage and would choose it again. The mifepristone and misoprostol intervention was shown to be cost-effective in comparison to misoprostol alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17405024. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 68. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Miscarriage is a common complication of pregnancy, affecting approximately one in four women. Sometimes, medical treatment (i.e. tablets) may be offered to start or speed up the miscarriage process in order for the womb to empty itself. A drug called misoprostol (a tablet that makes the womb contract) is currently recommended for this treatment. However, the addition of another drug called mifepristone [a tablet that reduces pregnancy hormones (Mifegyne^®, Exelgyn, Paris, France)] might help the miscarriage to resolve more quickly. Therefore, we carried out the MifeMiso trial to test if mifepristone plus misoprostol is more effective than misoprostol alone in resolving miscarriage within 7 days. Women were randomly allocated by a computer to receive either mifepristone or placebo, followed by misoprostol 2 days later. Neither the women nor their health-care professionals knew which treatment they received. Some women also talked to the researchers about their experiences of taking part in the study. In total, 711 women were randomised to receive either mifepristone plus misoprostol or placebo plus misoprostol. Overall, 83% of women who received mifepristone plus misoprostol had miscarriage resolution within 7 days, compared with 76% of the women who received a placebo plus misoprostol. Surgery was required less often in women who received mifepristone plus misoprostol: 17% of women who received it required surgery, compared with 25% of women who received the placebo. Treatment with mifepristone did not appear to have any negative effects. Treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol was more cost-effective than misoprostol alone, with an average saving of £182 per woman. Having taken part in the study, most women would choose medical management again and would recommend it to someone they knew who was experiencing a miscarriage.

Association between hyperemesis gravidarum and psychological symptoms, psychosocial outcomes and infant bonding: a two-point prospective case-control multicentre survey study in an inner city setting.

OBJECTIVES: To assess if there is any association between hyperemesis gravidarum (HG), psychological morbidity and infant bonding and to quantify any psychosocial consequences of HG. DESIGN: Two-point prospective case-control, multicentre survey study with antenatal and postnatal data collection. SETTING: Three London hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women at ≤12 completed weeks gestation recruited consecutively over 2 years. Women with HG were recruited at the time of admission; controls recruited from a low risk antenatal clinic. 106 women were recruited to the case group and 108 to the control. Response rates at antenatal data collection were 87% and 85% in the case and control groups, respectively. Postnatally, the response rate was 90% in both groups. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were psychological morbidity in the antenatal and postnatal periods, infant bonding in the postnatal period and psychosocial implications of HG. Secondary outcomes were the effects of severity and longevity of HG and assessment of correlation between Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale scores and maternal-to-infant bonding scores. RESULTS: Antenatally, 49% of cases had probable depression compared with 6% of controls (OR 14.4 (5.29 to 39.44)). Postnatally, 29% of cases had probable depression versus 7% of controls (OR 5.2 (1.65 to 17.21)). There was no direct association between HG and infant bonding. 53% of women in the HG group reported needing four or more weeks of sick leave compared with 2% in the control group (OR 60.5 (95% CI 8.4 to 2535.6)). CONCLUSIONS: Long-lasting psychological morbidity associated with HG was evident. Significantly more women in the case group sought help for mental health symptoms in the antenatal period, however very few were diagnosed with or treated for depression in pregnancy or referred to specialist perinatal mental health services. HG did not directly affect infant bonding. Women in the case group required long periods off work, highlighting the socioeconomic impact of HG.

Mifepristone and misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for the management of missed miscarriage (MifeMiso): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The anti-progesterone drug mifepristone and the prostaglandin misoprostol can be used to treat missed miscarriage. However, it is unclear whether a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol is more effective than administering misoprostol alone. We investigated whether treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol would result in a higher rate of completion of missed miscarriage compared with misoprostol alone. METHODS: MifeMiso was a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial in 28 UK hospitals. Women were eligible for enrolment if they were aged 16 years and older, diagnosed with a missed miscarriage by pelvic ultrasound scan in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, chose to have medical management of miscarriage, and were willing and able to give informed consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a single dose of oral mifepristone 200 mg or an oral placebo tablet, both followed by a single dose of vaginal, oral, or sublingual misoprostol 800 µg 2 days later. Randomisation was managed via a secure web-based randomisation program, with minimisation to balance study group assignments according to maternal age (<30 years vs ≥30 years), body-mass index (<35 kg/m2vs ≥35 kg/m2), previous parity (nulliparous women vs parous women), gestational age (<70 days vs ≥70 days), amount of bleeding (Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart score; ≤2 vs ≥3), and randomising centre. Participants, clinicians, pharmacists, trial nurses, and midwives were masked to study group assignment throughout the trial. The primary outcome was failure to spontaneously pass the gestational sac within 7 days after random assignment. Primary analyses were done according to intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN17405024. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2017, and July 22, 2019, 2595 women were identified as being eligible for the MifeMiso trial. 711 women were randomly assigned to receive either mifepristone and misoprostol (357 women) or placebo and misoprostol (354 women). 696 (98%) of 711 women had available data for the primary outcome. 59 (17%) of 348 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group did not pass the gestational sac spontaneously within 7 days versus 82 (24%) of 348 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (risk ratio [RR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·54-0·99; p=0·043). 62 (17%) of 355 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group required surgical intervention to complete the miscarriage versus 87 (25%) of 353 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (0·71, 0·53-0·95; p=0·021). We found no difference in incidence of adverse events between the study groups. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol was more effective than misoprostol alone in the management of missed miscarriage. Women with missed miscarriage should be offered mifepristone pretreatment before misoprostol to increase the chance of successful miscarriage management, while reducing the need for miscarriage surgery. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Progesterone to prevent miscarriage in women with early pregnancy bleeding: the PRISM RCT.

BACKGROUND: Progesterone is essential for a healthy pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone therapy may rescue a pregnancy in women with early pregnancy bleeding, which is a symptom that is strongly associated with miscarriage. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess the effects of vaginal micronised progesterone in women with vaginal bleeding in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. (2) To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of progesterone in women with early pregnancy bleeding. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of progesterone in women with early pregnancy vaginal bleeding. SETTING: A total of 48 hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 16-39 years with early pregnancy bleeding. INTERVENTIONS: Women aged 16-39 years were randomly assigned to receive twice-daily vaginal suppositories containing either 400 mg of progesterone or a matched placebo from presentation to 16 weeks of gestation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. In addition, a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from an NHS and NHS/Personal Social Services perspective. RESULTS: A total of 4153 women from 48 hospitals in the UK received either progesterone (n = 2079) or placebo (n = 2074). The follow-up rate for the primary outcome was 97.2% (4038 out of 4153 participants). The live birth rate was 75% (1513 out of 2025 participants) in the progesterone group and 72% (1459 out of 2013 participants) in the placebo group (relative rate 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.07; p = 0.08). A significant subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.007) was identified for prespecified subgroups by the number of previous miscarriages: none (74% in the progesterone group vs. 75% in the placebo group; relative rate 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.04; p = 0.72); one or two (76% in the progesterone group vs. 72% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.12; p = 0.07); and three or more (72% in the progesterone group vs. 57% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.51; p = 0.004). A significant post hoc subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.01) was identified in the subgroup of participants with early pregnancy bleeding and any number of previous miscarriage(s) (75% in the progesterone group vs. 70% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.15; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events between the groups. The results of the health economics analysis show that progesterone was more costly than placebo (£7655 vs. £7572), with a mean cost difference of £83 (adjusted mean difference £76, 95% confidence interval -£559 to £711) between the two arms. Thus, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of progesterone compared with placebo was estimated as £3305 per additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation. CONCLUSIONS: Progesterone therapy in the first trimester of pregnancy did not result in a significantly higher rate of live births among women with threatened miscarriage overall, but an important subgroup effect was identified. A conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of the PRISM trial would depend on the amount that society is willing to pay to increase the chances of an additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. For future work, we plan to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis using all existing data sets. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14163439, EudraCT 2014-002348-42 and Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) 158326. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Miscarriage is a common complication of pregnancy that affects one in five pregnancies. Several small studies have suggested that progesterone, a hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy, may reduce the risk of miscarriage in women presenting with early pregnancy bleeding. This research was undertaken to test whether or not progesterone given to pregnant women with early pregnancy bleeding would increase the number of live births when compared with placebo (dummy treatment). The women participating in the study had an equal chance of receiving progesterone or placebo, as determined by a computer; one group received progesterone (400 mg twice daily as vaginal pessaries) and the other group received placebo with an identical appearance. Treatment began when women presented with vaginal bleeding, were < 12 weeks of gestation and were found to have at least a pregnancy sac on an ultrasound scan. Treatment was stopped at 16 weeks of gestation, or earlier if the pregnancy ended before 16 weeks. Neither the participants nor their health-care professionals knew which treatment was being received. In total, 23,775 women were screened and 4153 women were randomised to receive either progesterone or placebo pessaries. Altogether, 2972 participants had a live birth after at least 34 weeks of gestation. Overall, the live birth rate in the progesterone group was 75% (1513 out of 2025 participants), compared with 72% (1459 out of 2013 participants) in the placebo group. Although the live birth rate was 3% higher in the progesterone group than in the placebo group, there was statistical uncertainty about this finding. However, it was observed that women with a history of one or more previous miscarriages and vaginal bleeding in their current pregnancy may benefit from progesterone. For women with no previous miscarriages, our analysis showed that the live birth rate was 74% (824 out of 1111 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 75% (840 out of 1127 participants) in the placebo group. For women with one or more previous miscarriages, the live birth rate was 75% (689 out of 914 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 70% (619 out of 886 participants) in the placebo group. The potential benefit appeared to be most strong for women with three or more previous miscarriages, who had a live birth rate of 72% (98 out of 137 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 57% (85 out of 148 participants) in the placebo group. Treatment with progesterone did not appear to have any negative effects.

A Randomized Trial of Progesterone in Women with Bleeding in Early Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding in early pregnancy is strongly associated with pregnancy loss. Progesterone is essential for the maintenance of pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone therapy may improve pregnancy outcomes in women who have bleeding in early pregnancy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate progesterone, as compared with placebo, in women with vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy. Women were randomly assigned to receive vaginal suppositories containing either 400 mg of progesterone or matching placebo twice daily, from the time at which they presented with bleeding through 16 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was the birth of a live-born baby after at least 34 weeks of gestation. The primary analysis was performed in all participants for whom data on the primary outcome were available. A sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome that included all the participants was performed with the use of multiple imputation to account for missing data. RESULTS: A total of 4153 women, recruited at 48 hospitals in the United Kingdom, were randomly assigned to receive progesterone (2079 women) or placebo (2074 women). The percentage of women with available data for the primary outcome was 97% (4038 of 4153 women). The incidence of live births after at least 34 weeks of gestation was 75% (1513 of 2025 women) in the progesterone group and 72% (1459 of 2013 women) in the placebo group (relative rate, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.07; P = 0.08). The sensitivity analysis, in which missing primary outcome data were imputed, resulted in a similar finding (relative rate, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.07; P = 0.08). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with bleeding in early pregnancy, progesterone therapy administered during the first trimester did not result in a significantly higher incidence of live births than placebo. (Funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment program; PRISM Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN14163439.).

A multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of combination methotrexate and gefitinib versus methotrexate alone to treat tubal ectopic pregnancies (GEM3): trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Tubal ectopic pregnancy (tEP) is the most common life-threatening condition in gynaecology. Treatment options include surgery and medical management. Stable women with tEPs with pre-treatment serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) levels < 1000 IU/L respond well to outpatient medical treatment with intramuscular methotrexate. However, tEPs with hCG > 1000 IU/L can take significant time to resolve with methotrexate and require multiple outpatient monitoring visits. In pre-clinical studies, we found that tEP implantation sites express high levels of epidermal growth factor receptor. In early-phase trials, we found that combination therapy with gefitinib, an orally active epidermal growth factor receptor antagonist, and methotrexate resolved tEPs without the need for surgery in over 70% of cases, did not cause significant toxicities, and was well tolerated. We describe the protocol of a randomised trial to assess the efficacy of combination gefitinib and methotrexate, versus methotrexate alone, in reducing the need for surgical intervention for tEPs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We propose to undertake a multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial (around 70 sites across the UK) and recruit 328 women with tEPs (with pre-treatment serum hCG of 1000-5000 IU/L). Women will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio by a secure online system to receive a single dose of intramuscular methotrexate (50 mg/m2) and either oral gefitinib or matched placebo (250 mg) daily for 7 days. Participants and healthcare providers will remain blinded to treatment allocation throughout the trial. The primary outcome is the need for surgical intervention for tEP. Secondary outcomes are the need for further methotrexate treatment, time to resolution of the tEP (serum hCG ≤ 15 IU/L), number of hospital visits associated with treatment (until resolution or scheduled/emergency surgery), and the return of menses by 3 months after resolution. We will also assess adverse events and reactions until day of resolution or surgery, and participant-reported acceptability at 3 months. DISCUSSION: A medical intervention that reduces the need for surgery and resolves tEP faster would be a favourable treatment alternative. If effective, we believe that gefitinib and methotrexate could become standard care for stable tEPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN67795930 . Registered 15 September 2016.

The potential value of activin B and fibronectin for the triage of pregnancies of unknown location and prediction of first trimester viability.

AIM: We have assessed the potential predictive ability of the biomarkers activin B and fibronectin (FN1) alone and when added to established markers for triaging patients as being at low or high risk of ectopic pregnancy (EP). We also assessed their use as predictors of viability at 12 weeks gestation. METHODS: Exploratory secondary analysis of a prospective study including all women classified as a pregnancy of known location (PUL) based on transvaginal ultrasonography between January and December 2007 at the early pregnancy unit of St Georges' Hospital (London). We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the diagnostic potential of the biomarkers to triage PUL at high risk of complications (EP or persistent PUL), and standard binary logistic regression to predict first trimester viability at 12 weeks. RESULTS: For discriminating high-risk (n = 16) from low-risk PUL (n = 93), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.60-0.85) for activin B and 0.55 (0.41-0.68) for FN1. Adding activin B to a multinomial logistic regression model incorporating ß-hCG ratio and initial progesterone yielded odds ratios of 0.16 (0.05-0.55) for failing vs high-risk PUL and 0.29 (0.07-1.19) for intrauterine vs high-risk PUL and increased the model's AUC from 0.84 to 0.89. At a risk threshold of 5% for high-risk PUL, sensitivity increased from 84% to 87% and specificity from 48% to 64%. For discriminating viable (n = 28) from non-viable (n = 81) pregnancies at 12 weeks, both markers had an AUC of 0.54. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggested that activin B may be a promising marker to improve PUL triage in addition to established markers.

Ambulatory versus inpatient management of severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: a randomised control trial with patient preference arm.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ambulatory (outpatient (OP)) treatment of severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) is as effective as inpatient (IP) care. DESIGN: Non-blinded randomised control trial (RCT) with patient preference arm. SETTING: Two multicentre teaching hospitals in London. PARTICIPANTS: Women less than 20 weeks' pregnant with severe NVP and associated ketonuria (>1+). METHODS: Women who agreed to the RCT were randomised via web-based application to either ambulatory or IP treatment. Women who declined randomisation underwent the treatment of their choice in the patient preference trial (PPT) arm. Treatment protocols, data collection and follow-up were the same for all participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was reduction in Pregnancy Unique Quantification of Emesis (PUQE) score 48 hours after starting treatment. Secondary outcome measures were duration of treatment, improvement in symptom scores and ketonuria at 48 hours, reattendances within 7 days of discharge and comparison of symptoms at 7 days postdischarge. RESULTS: 152/174 eligible women agreed to participate with 77/152 (51%) recruited to the RCT and 75/152 (49%) to the PPT.Patients were initially compared in four groups (randomised IP, randomised OP, non-randomised IP and non-randomised OP). Comprehensive cohort analysis of participants in the randomised group (RCT) and non-randomised group (PPT) did not demonstrate any differences in patient demographics or baseline clinical characteristics. Pooled analysis of IP versus OP groups showed no difference in reduction in PUQE score at 48 hours (p=0.86). There was no difference in change in eating score (p=0.69), drinking score (p=0.77), well-being rating (p=0.64) or reduction in ketonuria (p=0.47) at 48 hours, with no difference in duration of index treatment episode (p=0.83) or reattendances within 7 days (p=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory management is an effective direct alternative to IP management of severe NVP. The trial also demonstrated that many women requiring treatment for severe NVP have strong preferences regarding treatment setting, which may need to be considered by care providers, especially given the psychological impact of severe NVP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN24659467 (March 2014).

Defining safe criteria to diagnose miscarriage: prospective observational multicentre study.

OBJECTIVES: To validate recent guidance changes by establishing the performance of cut-off values for embryo crown-rump length and mean gestational sac diameter to diagnose miscarriage with high levels of certainty. Secondary aims were to examine the influence of gestational age on interpretation of mean gestational sac diameter and crown-rump length values, determine the optimal intervals between scans and findings on repeat scans that definitively diagnose pregnancy failure.) DESIGN: Prospective multicentre observational trial. SETTING: Seven hospital based early pregnancy assessment units in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 2845 women with intrauterine pregnancies of unknown viability included if transvaginal ultrasonography showed an intrauterine pregnancy of uncertain viability. In three hospitals this was initially defined as an empty gestational sac <20 mm mean diameter with or without a visible yolk sac but no embryo, or an embryo with crown-rump length <6 mm with no heartbeat. Following amended guidance in December 2011 this definition changed to a gestational sac size <25 mm or embryo crown-rump length <7 mm. At one unit the definition was extended throughout to include a mean gestational sac diameter <30 mm or embryo crown-rump length <8 mm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean gestational sac diameter, crown-rump length, and presence or absence of embryo heart activity at initial and repeat transvaginal ultrasonography around 7-14 days later. The final outcome was pregnancy viability at 11-14 weeks' gestation. RESULTS: The following indicated a miscarriage at initial scan: mean gestational sac diameter ≥ 25 mm with an empty sac (364/364 specificity: 100%, 95% confidence interval 99.0% to 100%), embryo with crown-rump length ≥ 7 mm without visible embryo heart activity (110/110 specificity: 100%, 96.7% to 100%), mean gestational sac diameter ≥ 18 mm for gestational sacs without an embryo presenting after 70 days' gestation (907/907 specificity: 100%, 99.6% to 100%), embryo with crown-rump length ≥ 3 mm without visible heart activity presenting after 70 days' gestation (87/87 specificity: 100%, 95.8% to 100%). The following were indicative of miscarriage at a repeat scan: initial scan and repeat scan after seven days or more showing an embryo without visible heart activity (103/103 specificity: 100%, 96.5% to 100%), pregnancies without an embryo and mean gestational sac diameter <12 mm where the mean diameter has not doubled after 14 days or more (478/478 specificity: 100%, 99.2% to 100%), pregnancies without an embryo and mean gestational sac diameter ≥ 12 mm showing no embryo heartbeat after seven days or more (150/150 specificity: 100%, 97.6% to 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Recently changed cut-off values of gestational sac and embryo size defining miscarriage are appropriate and not too conservative but do not take into account gestational age. Guidance on timing between scans and expected findings on repeat scans are still too liberal. Protocols for miscarriage diagnosis should be reviewed to account for this evidence to avoid misdiagnosis and the risk of terminating viable pregnancies.

Accurate prediction of pregnancy viability by means of a simple scoring system.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the performance of a simple scoring system to predict whether women will have an ongoing viable intrauterine pregnancy beyond the first trimester? SUMMARY ANSWER: A simple scoring system using demographic and initial ultrasound variables accurately predicts pregnancy viability beyond the first trimester with an area under the curve (AUC) in a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.924 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.900-0.947] on an independent test set. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Individual demographic and ultrasound factors, such as maternal age, vaginal bleeding and gestational sac size, are strong predictors of miscarriage. Previous mathematical models have combined individual risk factors with reasonable performance. A simple scoring system derived from a mathematical model that can be easily implemented in clinical practice has not previously been described for the prediction of ongoing viability. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION: This was a prospective observational study in a single early pregnancy assessment centre during a 9-month period. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING AND METHODS: A cohort of 1881 consecutive women undergoing transvaginal ultrasound scan at a gestational age <84 days were included. Women were excluded if the first trimester outcome was not known. Demographic features, symptoms and ultrasound variables were tested for their influence on ongoing viability. Logistic regression was used to determine the influence on first trimester viability from demographics and symptoms alone, ultrasound findings alone and then from all the variables combined. Each model was developed on a training data set, and a simple scoring system was derived from this. This scoring system was tested on an independent test data set. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final outcome based on a total of 1435 participants was an ongoing viable pregnancy in 885 (61.7%) and early pregnancy loss in 550 (38.3%) women. The scoring system using significant demographic variables alone (maternal age and amount of bleeding) to predict ongoing viability gave an AUC of 0.724 (95% CI = 0.692-0.756) in the training set and 0.729 (95% CI = 0.684-0.774) in the test set. The scoring system using significant ultrasound variables alone (mean gestation sac diameter, mean yolk sac diameter and the presence of fetal heart beat) gave an AUC of 0.873 (95% CI = 0.850-0.897) and 0.900 (95% CI = 0.871-0.928) in the training and the test sets, respectively. The final scoring system using demographic and ultrasound variables together gave an AUC of 0.901 (95% CI = 0.881-0.920) and 0.924 (CI = 0.900-0.947) in the training and the test sets, respectively. After defining the cut-off at which the sensitivity is 0.90 on the training set, this model performed with a sensitivity of 0.92, specificity of 0.73, positive predictive value of 84.7% and negative predictive value of 85.4% in the test set. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: BMI and smoking variables were a potential omission in the data collection and might further improve the model performance if included. A further limitation is the absence of information on either bleeding or pain in 18% of women. Caution should be exercised before implementation of this scoring system prior to further external validation studies WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This simple scoring system incorporates readily available data that are routinely collected in clinical practice and does not rely on complex data entry. As such it could, unlike most mathematical models, be easily incorporated into normal early pregnancy care, where women may appreciate an individualized calculation of the likelihood of ongoing pregnancy viability. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Research by V.V.B. supported by Research Council KUL: GOA MaNet, PFV/10/002 (OPTEC), several PhD/postdoc & fellow grants; IWT: TBM070706-IOTA3, PhD Grants; IBBT; Belgian Federal Science Policy Office: IUAP P7/(DYSCO, `Dynamical systems, control and optimization', 2012-2017). T.B. is supported by the Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

When is a pregnancy nonviable and what criteria should be used to define miscarriage?

In 2011, the first systematic review of the evidence behind the diagnostic criteria for miscarriage was published. It states, "findings were limited by the small number and poor quality of the studies," and concluded that further studies were, "urgently required before setting future standards for the accurate diagnosis of early embryonic demise." This implies that data used to define criteria to diagnose miscarriage are unreliable. The 2011 Irish Health Service executive review into miscarriage misdiagnosis highlighted this issue. In parallel to these publications a multicenter prospective study was published examining cut-off values for mean sac diameter (MSD) and embryo size to define miscarriage. The authors also published evidence on expected findings when ultrasonography is repeated at an interval. This led to guidance on diagnostic criteria for miscarriage in the UK changing. These new criteria state miscarriage be considered only when: an empty gestation sac has an MSD of ≥ 25 mm (with no obvious yolk sac), or embryonic crown rump length ≥ 7 mm (the latter without evidence of fetal heart activity). If in doubt, repeating scans at an interval is emphasized. It is axiomatic that decisions about embryonic viability must not be open to doubt. So it is surprising how little evidence exists to support previous guidance. Any clinician working in this area knows of women being wrongly informed that their pregnancy has failed. This cannot be acceptable and guidance in this area must be "failsafe."

A mathematical model for interpretable clinical decision support with applications in gynecology.

BACKGROUND: Over time, methods for the development of clinical decision support (CDS) systems have evolved from interpretable and easy-to-use scoring systems to very complex and non-interpretable mathematical models. In order to accomplish effective decision support, CDS systems should provide information on how the model arrives at a certain decision. To address the issue of incompatibility between performance, interpretability and applicability of CDS systems, this paper proposes an innovative model structure, automatically leading to interpretable and easily applicable models. The resulting models can be used to guide clinicians when deciding upon the appropriate treatment, estimating patient-specific risks and to improve communication with patients. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We propose the interval coded scoring (ICS) system, which imposes that the effect of each variable on the estimated risk is constant within consecutive intervals. The number and position of the intervals are automatically obtained by solving an optimization problem, which additionally performs variable selection. The resulting model can be visualised by means of appealing scoring tables and color bars. ICS models can be used within software packages, in smartphone applications, or on paper, which is particularly useful for bedside medicine and home-monitoring. The ICS approach is illustrated on two gynecological problems: diagnosis of malignancy of ovarian tumors using a dataset containing 3,511 patients, and prediction of first trimester viability of pregnancies using a dataset of 1,435 women. Comparison of the performance of the ICS approach with a range of prediction models proposed in the literature illustrates the ability of ICS to combine optimal performance with the interpretability of simple scoring systems. CONCLUSIONS: The ICS approach can improve patient-clinician communication and will provide additional insights in the importance and influence of available variables. Future challenges include extensions of the proposed methodology towards automated detection of interaction effects, multi-class decision support systems, prognosis and high-dimensional data.

Improved modeling of clinical data with kernel methods.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the rise of high-throughput technologies, clinical data such as age, gender and medical history guide clinical management for most diseases and examinations. To improve clinical management, available patient information should be fully exploited. This requires appropriate modeling of relevant parameters. METHODS: When kernel methods are used, traditional kernel functions such as the linear kernel are often applied to the set of clinical parameters. These kernel functions, however, have their disadvantages due to the specific characteristics of clinical data, being a mix of variable types with each variable its own range. We propose a new kernel function specifically adapted to the characteristics of clinical data. RESULTS: The clinical kernel function provides a better representation of patients' similarity by equalizing the influence of all variables and taking into account the range r of the variables. Moreover, it is robust with respect to changes in r. Incorporated in a least squares support vector machine, the new kernel function results in significantly improved diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of therapy response. This is illustrated on four clinical data sets within gynecology, with an average increase in test area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.023, 0.021, 0.122 and 0.019, respectively. Moreover, when combining clinical parameters and expression data in three case studies on breast cancer, results improved overall with use of the new kernel function and when considering both data types in a weighted fashion, with a larger weight assigned to the clinical parameters. The increase in AUC with respect to a standard kernel function and/or unweighted data combination was maximum 0.127, 0.042 and 0.118 for the three case studies. CONCLUSION: For clinical data consisting of variables of different types, the proposed kernel function--which takes into account the type and range of each variable--has shown to be a better alternative for linear and non-linear classification problems.

Pregnancy of unknown location: a consensus statement of nomenclature, definitions, and outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To improve the interpretation of future studies in women who are initially diagnosed with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL), we propose a consensus statement with definitions of population, target disease, and final outcome. DESIGN: A review of literature and a series of collaborative international meetings were used to develop a consensus for definitions and final outcomes of women initially diagnosed with a PUL. RESULT(S): Global differences were noted in populations studied and in the definitions of outcomes. We propose to define initial ultrasound classification of findings into five categories: definite ectopic pregnancy (EP), probable EP, PUL, probable intrauterine pregnancy (IUP), and definite IUP. Patients with a PUL should be followed and final outcomes should be categorized as visualized EP, visualized IUP, spontaneously resolved PUL, and persisting PUL. Those with the transient condition of a persisting PUL should ultimately be classified as nonvisualized EP, treated persistent PUL, resolved persistent PUL, or histologic IUP. These specific categories can be used to characterize the natural history or location (intrauterine vs. extrauterine) of any early gestation where the initial location is unknown. CONCLUSION(S): Careful definition of populations and classification of outcomes should optimize objective interpretation of research, allow objective assessment of future reproductive prognosis, and hopefully lead to improved clinical care of women initially identified to have a PUL.

Diagnosing miscarriage.

Miscarriage is the most common serious pregnancy complication affecting approximately 30% of biochemical pregnancies and 11-20% of clinically recognised pregnancies. The diagnosis of miscarriage is made most commonly by trans-vaginal ultrasound (TVS) assessment. Evidence-based criteria should be employed for the diagnosis of delayed and incomplete miscarriage. Complete miscarriage should not be diagnosed with TVS alone without serial biochemical confirmation (unless an intrauterine gestation sac has previously been visualised). After a clinical assessment suggesting complete miscarriage, 45% of women will have retained tissue on ultrasound, whilst women with an ultrasound scan showing an empty uterus with a history suggestive of miscarriage will be found to have an ectopic pregnancy in 6% of cases. Prediction of the diagnosis of miscarriage using maternal history and ultrasound features may be helpful in counselling women towards likely pregnancy outcome and planning appropriate further assessment. Use of three-dimensional ultrasound has not improved diagnosis of miscarriage. After a diagnosis of miscarriage, half the women undergo significant psychological effects, which may last for up to 12 months.

Management strategies for hyperemesis.

Nausea and vomiting occur in up to 80% of normal pregnancies. Hyperemesis gravidarum, resulting in dehydration and ketonuria, is a more severe, disabling and potentially life threatening condition affecting up to 1.5% of pregnancies. Treatment is supportive with intravenous rehydration, antiemetics and correction of vitamin deficiency to minimize complications. There are good safety data to support the use of antihistamines, phenothiazines and metoclopromide in hyperemesis gravidarum, though trials of efficacy are lacking and there is little evidence on which to chose the optimum therapy. This review discusses the diagnosis and management of hyperemesis gravidarum and the prevention, recognition and treatment of the serious complications of Wernicke encephalopathy, osmotic demyelination syndrome and thromboembolism.

Diagnosis and management of ovarian cyst accidents.

Ovarian cyst accidents include cyst rupture, haemorrhage and torsion. Torsion commonly occurs to the whole adnexa and is not necessarily associated with an ovarian cyst. Suspected adnexal torsion should always be managed with early laparoscopy and de-torsion of the twisted tube or ovary. Ovarian cyst rupture and haemorrhage usually occur in association with physiological (functional) cysts and are generally self-limiting. Laparoscopy may be necessary in cases where the diagnosis is in doubt or for haemodynamic compromise. Clinical features of ovarian cyst accidents are nonspecific. Ultrasound is the first-line investigation and is diagnostic in the case of haemorrhage. Typical ultrasound findings have been described for ovarian torsion, including an enlarged oedematous ovary with peripheral displacement of follicles. Doppler blood flow findings are variable and not diagnostic. Recurrent cyst rupture or haemorrhage should be prevented by suppression of ovulation, usually with the combined oral contraceptive. Fixation of the ovary by a variety of techniques should be considered to prevent recurrent torsion.