Mother-child separation after twin birth in a maternity unit with an appropriate level of neonatal care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the mother-child separation rate in twin pregnancies delivered in maternity units offering an appropriate level of neonatal care. METHODS: JUMODA is a French, prospective, population-based cohort study of twin deliveries, including 7998 women who gave birth in maternity units with appropriate levels of neonatal care based on thresholds for weeks of gestational age (wGA) and birth weight according to French guidelines: level I (≥36 wGA), IIA (≥34 wGA), IIB (≥32 wGA and ≥ 1500 g), and IIII (<32 wGA or < 1500 g). The primary outcome was mother-child separation, defined as the transfer of at least one twin or the mother to another hospital. RESULTS: Mother-child separation occurred in 2.1% of pregnancies. This rate was significantly higher in level I (4.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-12.5) and IIA (3.4%, 95% CI 2.4-4.7) compared with level IIB (1.6%, 95% CI 1.1-2.3) and level III maternity units (2.1%, 95% CI 1.9-2.8). In level IIA units, the rate of mother-child separation was higher for babies born between 34 and 36 wGA (8.3%) than for those born at 36 wGA or beyond (1.7%). In level IIb, the rate of mother-child separation for babies born between 32 and 34 wGA (7.5%) was higher than for those born between 34 and 36 wGA (2.1%) and at 36 wGA or beyond (0.9%). CONCLUSION: Mother-child separation rates were low but differed by level of care. By using specific thresholds for twins to define levels of care, rather than data from singleton births, one-fifth of mother-child separations could have been avoided.

Internal Version Compared With Pushing for Delivery of Cephalic Second Twins.

OBJECTIVE: To assess neonatal morbidity and mortality according to whether cephalic second twins were born after internal version followed by total breech extraction or after instructions to push. We hypothesized that interval version would result in shorter intertwin delivery intervals and lower cesarean delivery rates for the second twin and therefore better neonatal outcomes. METHODS: These planned analyses of the JUMODA (JUmeaux MODe d'Accouchement) cohort, a national prospective population-based study of twin deliveries, examined births of cephalic second twins after vaginal birth of the first twin at or after 32 weeks of gestation. The internal version group of second twins born in breech presentation after obstetric maneuvers was compared with the pushing group, comprising those born in cephalic presentation. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Multivariate modified Poisson regression models were used to control for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of 2,256 cephalic second twins, 487 (21.6%) were born in breech presentation after internal version and total breech extraction and 1,769 (78.4%) in cephalic presentation after pushing. Composite neonatal morbidity and mortality was not lower in the internal version (17/487 [3.5%]) compared with the pushing group (38/1,769 [2.1%]; adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.73 [95% CI 0.98-3.05]), although median [quartile 1-quartile 3] intertwin delivery intervals were shorter (5 [4-8] vs 8 [5-12] minutes, P<.001) and the cesarean delivery rate for the second twin lower (5/487 [1.0%] vs 66/1,769 [3.7%], P=.002). Subgroup analyses showed no difference between groups at or after 37 weeks of gestation but higher composite neonatal morbidity and mortality after internal version before 37 weeks (14/215 [6.5%] vs 26/841 [3.1%]; aRR 2.18 [95% CI 1.15-4.13]). Secondary analyses according to center expertise in the overall population and stratified by gestational age yielded concordant results. CONCLUSION: Although our sample size precluded a robust assessment for small differences in outcomes between groups, internal version followed by total breech extraction of cephalic second twins was not associated with better neonatal outcomes than pushing.

[Update regarding the management of vulvar cancer: The guidelines of the Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris]. / Mise à jour concernant la prise en charge du cancer de la vulve : les recommandations de l'Assistance publique­hôpitaux de Paris.

Vulvar cancer is a rare disease, which represents 4% of gynecological tumors with an incidence of 0.5 to 1.5 per 100,000 women per year in France. Vulvar cancers are induced in 30 to 69% of cases by the presence of papillomavirus (HPV), in particular HPV 16 and 18, and can also occur in an inflammatory context. The diagnosis is made by histological examination of a vulvar biopsy. The histological subtype is a squamous cell carcinoma in 90% of cases. The 5-year survival of patients with vulvar cancer ranges from 86% for localized stages (FIGO I and II) to 57% for advanced stages (FIGO III and IVA), and 17% in case of metastatic disease (FIGO IVB). The treatment of vulvar cancer is mainly surgical, but radiotherapy and chemotherapy have become more important in recent years. Management has evolved into a personalized multidisciplinary approach, where each therapeutic decision must be discussed in a multidisciplinary consultation meeting. Surgical excision with tumor- free margins is central in the management of early stages. The indication for radiotherapy and brachytherapy should be discussed in the event that the excisional margins are positive in early stages. Radiotherapy is indicated in cases of lymph node involvement or in a neoadjuvant situation if the tumor is not immediately resectable. In this situation, it can be associated with chemotherapy. Chemotherapy alone is the treatment of diseases that are metastatic at the time of diagnosis.