Preterm cesarean delivery for nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing: Risk factors and predictability of adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare adverse outcomes among preterm births that underwent cesarean delivery (CD) for non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracing (NRFHT) versus those that did not. STUDY DESIGN: Consortium on Safe Labor Database was utilized for this secondary analysis. Inclusion criteria were non-anomalous, singleton at 23.0 to 36.6 weeks who labored for at least 2 h. Composite adverse neonatal outcomes included any of the following intraventricular hemorrhage grade III or IV, seizures, mechanical ventilation, sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis 2 or 3, or neonatal death. Composite adverse maternal outcomes included any of the following postpartum hemorrhage, endometritis, blood transfusion, chorioamnionitis, admission to intensive care unit, thromboembolism, or death. RESULTS: Of 228,438 births, 29,592 (13.0%) delivered preterm, and 16,679 (56.4%) labored for at least 2 hrs. CD for NR FHRT was done in 1,220 (7.3%). The rate of composite adverse neonatal outcome was different among those that had CD for NR FHRT (26.7%) versus those that did not (16.6%; aRR 1.59, 95% CI 1.43-1.76). Composite adverse maternal outcomes did not differ between the groups. The area under the curve for risk factors to identify composite adverse neonatal outcome was 0.81, and for composite adverse maternal outcomes, 0.64. CONCLUSIONS: Subsequent to CD for NR FHRT, composite adverse neonatal outcome is 59% higher among preterm births when compared to delivery with reassuring tracing; composite adverse maternal outcomes did not differ between the groups.

Cesarean delivery at term for non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracing: risk factors and predictability.

OBJECTIVE: To delineate risk factors for adverse outcomes among those who underwent cesarean delivery (CD) for non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracing (NRFHT) and ascertain whether neonatal or maternal morbidity can be predicted accurately. METHODS: The Consortium on Safe Labor Database was utilized for this secondary analysis. Inclusion criteria were non-anomalous, singleton gestations between 37.0 and 41.6 weeks who underwent CD for NRFHT. Composite adverse neonatal outcomes (CANO) included Apgar <5 at 5 min, seizures, mechanical ventilation, sepsis, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis or neonatal death. Composite adverse maternal outcomes (CAMO) included endometritis, blood transfusion, wound complication, admission to intensive care unit, thromboembolism, hysterectomy or death. Bivariable analysis and multivariable Poisson regression were used to identify risk factors independently associated with adverse outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were created to evaluate the predictive value of the models for adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Of 228,438 births in the database, 7310 individuals (3.7%) met inclusion criteria. Among this cohort, CANO occurred 3.8% of the time. CANO was less common among people over 35 years (9.8% versus 18.4% p < .01) but was more common among those with at least high-school education (15.3% versus 11.2%; p < .01), varying by ethnicity (p < .01). CAMO occurred in 3.4% and was less common among those undergoing induction of labor (37.3% versus 49.4%; p < .01) and more common among those with clinical chorioamnionitis (8.4% versus 4.3%; p < .01). The area under the curve (AUC) for ROC curve to identify CANO was 0.63 implying a limited ability to predict neonatal adverse outcomes. The AUC for identifying women with maternal adverse outcomes was 0.69 also indicating a moderate prediction ability. CONCLUSIONS: Among singletons between 37 and 41 weeks who labored, the rate of CD for NRFHT was about 3.7% and among them CANO occurred in 3.8%. While risk factors for adverse neonatal outcomes following CD for NRFHT are identifiable, they do not suffice to predict them.

Carcinoma of the Bartholin Gland: A Review of 33 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: Primary carcinoma of the Bartholin gland is a rare malignancy that accounts for approximately 5% of vulvar carcinomas. The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of women with primary Bartholin gland carcinoma (BGC) with those with non-Bartholin gland-related vulvar carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 429 patients with invasive vulvar carcinoma evaluated at a single institution between 1993 and 2011 was performed. Medical records were reviewed for demographic data, pathologic information, treatment type, and recurrence/outcome information. These variables were compared between patients with primary BGC and patients with non-Bartholin gland-related vulvar carcinoma. RESULTS: Thirty-three (7.7%) of the 429 patients with invasive vulvar carcinoma had primary carcinoma of the Bartholin gland. Twenty-nine patients (87.9%) had squamous cell histology and 4 patients (12.1%) had adenocarcinoma. When compared with non-Bartholin gland-related vulvar carcinoma, patients with primary BGC had a younger age at diagnosis (median, 57 vs 63 years; P = 0.045), had a higher rate of stage III/IV disease (60.6% vs 35.8%; P = 0.008), and were more likely to receive radiation therapy (78.8% vs 43.9%; P < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to histologic subtype, lymphovascular space involvement, perineural invasion, positive margins, recurrence-free survival, or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being diagnosed at a more advanced stage, patients with primary carcinoma of the Bartholin gland seem to have similar oncologic outcomes and survival rates to patients with non-Bartholin gland-related vulvar carcinoma.