Management of female pelvic organ prolapse-Summary of the 2021 HAS guidelines.

When a patient presents with symptoms suggestive of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), clinical evaluation should include an assessment of symptoms, their impact on daily life and rule out other pelvic pathologies. The prolapse should be described compartment by compartment, indicating the extent of the externalization for each. The diagnosis of POP is clinical. Additional exams may be requested to explore the symptoms associated or not explained by the observed prolapse. Pelvic floor muscle training and pessaries are non-surgical conservative treatment options recommended as first-line therapy for pelvic organ prolapse. They can be offered in combination and be associated with the management of modifiable risk factors for prolapse. If the conservative therapeutic options do not meet the patient's expectations, surgery should be proposed if the symptoms are disabling, related to pelvic organ prolapse, detected on clinical examination and significant (stage 2 or more of the POP-Q classification). Surgical routes for POP repair can be abdominal with mesh placement, or vaginal with autologous tissue. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is recommended for cases of apical and anterior prolapse. Autologous vaginal surgery (including colpocleisis) is a recommended option for elderly and fragile patients. For cases of isolated rectocele, the posterior vaginal route with autologous tissue should be preferentially performed over the transanal route. The decision to place a mesh must be made in consultation with a multidisciplinary team. After the surgery, the patient should be reassessed by the surgeon, even in the absence of symptoms or complications, and in the long term by a primary care or specialist doctor.

Monitoring Breast Cancer Care Quality at National and Local Level Using the French National Cancer Cohort.

PURPOSE: The French National Cancer Institute has developed, in partnership with the French National Authority for Health, breast cancer-specific Care Quality, and Safety Indicators (BC QIs). With regard to the most common form of cancer, our aim is to support local and national quality initiatives, to improve BC pathways and outcomes, reduce heterogeneity of practice and regional inequities. In this study, we measure the BC QIs available in the French National medico-administrative cancer database, the French Cancer Cohort, for 2018. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BC QIs are developed according to the RAND method. QIs are based on good clinical practice and care pathway recommendations. QI computation should be automatable without any additional workload for data collection. They will be published annually for all stakeholders, and especially hospitals. RESULTS: Finally, ten feasible and pertinent QIs were selected. In France, BC care was found to be close to compliance with most QIs: proportion of patients undergoing biopsy prior to first treatment (94.5%), proportion of patients undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for BC (94.5%), proportion of women undergoing radiotherapy within 12 weeks after surgery and without chemotherapy (86.2%), proportion of DCIS patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (54.3%) and proportion of women with NMIBC undergoing breast reintervention (14.4%). However, some are still far from their recommended rate. In particular, some QIs vary considerably from one region, or one patient, to another. CONCLUSION: Each result needs to be analyzed locally to find care quality leverage. This will strengthen transparency actions aimed at the public.

Consensus of best practice in intrauterine contraception in France.

Objective: Our aim was to provide a consensus of best practice in intrauterine contraception (IUC) for French practitioners. Methods: A meeting of 38 gynaecologists was held to establish a consensus of best practice in IUC, using the validated nominal group (NG) method to reach consensus. Seventy questions were posed covering insertion, monitoring and removal of IUC devices. Two working groups were formed and all proposals were voted on, discussed and approved by the NG. Results: Of the 70 questions asked, answers to only four failed to reach NG consensus. While, in general, the IUC practices of French gynaecologists are in line with international guidelines, some notable differences were identified: for example, when to use the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus the copper intrauterine device; practice recommendations in the event of upper genital tract infections; and immediate postpartum insertion. Clinicians are encouraged to inform women about IUC, irrespective of their age or parity. In general, the wishes and characteristics of the woman must be the main criteria informing the choice of IUC, once all potential contraindications have been excluded and information about IUC shared. Conclusions: This consensus paper is intended to update and standardise knowledge about IUC for health care professionals, to address any reticence about use of this contraceptive method.

The CORALIE study: improving patient education to help new users better understand their oral contraceptive.

OBJECTIVES: Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are the most widely used contraceptive method in Europe. Paradoxically, rates of unintended pregnancy and abortion are still remarkably high. A lack of knowledge about COCs is often reported to lead to poor adherence, suggesting an unmet need for adequate contraceptive counselling. Our objective was to investigate the impact on the knowledge level of users of a structured approach to deliver contraceptive information for a first COC prescription. METHODS: The Oral Contraception Project to Optimise Patient Information (CORALIE) is a multicentre, prospective, randomised study conducted in France between March 2009 and January 2013. The intervention involved providing either an 'essential information' checklist or unstructured counselling to new COC users. The outcome measure was a questionnaire that assessed whether the information provided to the new user by the gynaecologist had been correctly understood. RESULTS: One hundred gynaecologists and an expert committee used the Delphi method to develop an 'essential information' checklist, after which 161 gynaecologists were randomised to two groups. Group I (n = 81) used the checklist with 324 new COC users and group II (n = 80) delivered unstructured information to 307 new COC users. The average score for understanding the information delivered during the visit was significantly higher in women in group I than in the women in group II, even after adjustment for age and previous history of pregnancy: 16.48/20 vs 14.27/20 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Delivering structured information for a first COC prescription is beneficial for understanding contraception. Our tool could ultimately contribute to increased adherence and should be investigated in a prospective study of long-term outcomes.

Coronary heart disease and HRT in France: MISSION study prospective phase results.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the morbidity incidence associated with Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRTs) in postmenopausal women. This paper presents the results concerning the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD). DESIGN: MISSION study started on 5 January 2004, the cutoff for data collection was June 2006 (follow-up no. 1). 'Exposed group': postmenopausal women currently on HRT, commonly prescribed in France or stopped < or =5 years previously. 'Unexposed group': never received HRT or stopped >5 years previously. RESULTS: Data were available for 4949 patients (without CHD at the beginning of the follow-up): 2693 Exposed group and 2256 Unexposed group. The incidence during follow-up no. 1 of postmenopausal CHD was not significantly different in the Exposed group (0.11%) compared with the Unexposed group (0.13%). In the Exposed group the time between start of HRT and menopause was 2.93 +/- 4.46 years in those who experienced CHD and 1.53 +/- 3.20 years in those who had no incidence of CHD (p = 0.3). CONCLUSION: In the MISSION cohort, no increased risk of CHD was found in the Exposed group compared with the Unexposed group.

Breast cancer incidence and hormone replacement therapy: results from the MISSION study, prospective phase.

BACKGROUND: The MISSION Study (Menopause: Risk of Breast Cancer, Morbidity and Prevalence) is a historical-prospective study with random patient selection to determine breast cancer incidence in postmenopausal women with or without hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The first prospective follow-up phase started on 5 January 2004 and the cut-off date for data collection was 30 June 2006. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were divided into two groups: an 'exposed group' of women on HRT regimens commonly prescribed in France or who had stopped < or =5 years previously; and an 'unexposed group' of women who had never received HRT or stopped >5 years previously. In total 6755 patients were included; and prospective data were available for 4949 patients: 2693 in the exposed group and 2256 in the unexposed group. Women in the exposed group were younger, less overweight, and had fewer first-degree family histories of breast cancer than women of the unexposed group. Mean duration of HRT exposure was 8.3 years, with 31% being exposed for > or =10 years. RESULTS: The incidence of new breast cancer cases was 0.64% in the exposed group and 0.70% in the unexposed group (relative risk RR(exposed/unexposed) = 0.914, 95% confidence interval = 0.449-1.858; not modified when adjusted for age). Mean age at breast cancer diagnosis was similar in both groups. Breast cancer incidence in the exposed group was not significantly affected by the route of estradiol administration (cutaneous 0.69%; oral 0.52%) or HRT type (estradiol alone 0.28%; estradiol + progesterone 0.40%; estradiol + synthetic progestin 0.94%). CONCLUSION: No evidence was found for an increased risk of breast cancer in women exposed to HRT compared with non-exposed women.

Breast cancer in postmenopausal women with and without hormone replacement therapy: preliminary results of the MISSION study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine breast cancer prevalence in postmenopausal women with or without hormone replacement therapy (HRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a historical-prospective study with random patient selection. Patients were recruited between January 2004 and February 2005, and allocated to two groups: the 'treated group' comprising postmenopausal women on HRT regimens commonly prescribed in France or who had stopped <5 years previously; or the 'untreated group' of postmenopausal women who had never received HRT or stopped >5 years previously. RESULTS: In total 6755 patients fulfilled all inclusion criteria: 3383 in the treated group and 3372 in the untreated group. The treated group was younger and less overweight than the untreated group (p < 0.0001). The treated group had fewer late menopauses (p = 0.0002) and fewer first-degree family histories of breast cancer (p < 0.0001). Mean HRT duration was 7.9 years; 30.5% of women were treated for >or=10 years. Breast cancer prevalence was 1.01% for the treated group and 6.21% for the untreated group. The European standardized incidence rate of breast cancer in the untreated group was significantly higher than in the French reference population (comparative incidence figure ratio (CIFR) = 2.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.50-3.36). In contrast, the European standardized incidence rate in the treated group on the studied HRT regimens (excluding some progestins) was not significantly different from that of the reference population (CIFR = 1.04; 95% CI = 0.35-3.15). CONCLUSION: The differences between the two groups may be due to French gynecologists' treatment strategy of avoiding prescribing HRT to high-risk women, and also perhaps to a specific 'studied HRT' effect.