McDonald versus Shirodkar cerclage technique in the prevention of preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage has been used for decades to reduce preterm birth. The Shirodkar and McDonald cerclage are the most commonly used techniques with no current consensus on the preferred technique. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of the Shirodkar and McDonald cerclage techniques in preventing preterm birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were sourced from six electronic databases and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies including women with a singleton pregnancy, requiring a cervical cerclage, using either the Shirodkar or McDonald technique that ran comparative analyses between the two techniques. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was preterm birth before 37 weeks, with analyses at 28, 32, 34 and 35 weeks. Secondary data were also collected on neonatal, maternal and obstetric outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen papers were included: 16 were retrospective cohort studies and one was a randomised controlled trial. The Shirodkar technique was significantly less likely to result in preterm birth before 37 weeks than the McDonald technique (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.98). This finding was supported by a statistically significant reduction in rates of preterm birth before 35, 34 and 32 weeks, PPROM, difference in cervical length, cerclage to delivery interval, and an increase in birthweight in the Shirodkar group. No difference was seen in preterm birth rates <28 weeks, neonatal mortality, chorioamnionitis, cervical laceration or caesarean section rates. The RR for preterm birth prior to 37 weeks was no longer significant when sensitivity analyses were performed removing studies with a serious risk of bias. However, similar analyses removing studies that utilised adjunctive progesterone strengthened the primary outcome (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93). CONCLUSION: Shirodkar cerclage reduces the rate of preterm birth prior to 35, 34 and 32 weeks' gestation when compared with McDonald cerclage; however, the overall quality of the studies in this review is low. Further, large, well-designed randomised controlled trials are required to address this important question to optimise care for women who may benefit from cervical cerclage.

McDonald versus Shirodkar cerclage technique in women requiring a prophylactic cerclage: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of death in children under five years. Spontaneous preterm birth (SPTB) is the major cause of preterm delivery. The key risk factors for SPTB are women who have a short cervix and women who have had previous preterm birth. Cervical cerclage has been used for several decades and has shown to decrease rates of preterm birth. The most commonly used cerclage techniques were described by Shirodkar and McDonald, with no current consensus on the preferred technique. The objective of this review is to determine and compare the effectiveness of both techniques. METHODS: Studies will be sourced from six electronic databases, as well as from experts in the field, reference lists, and grey literature. Eligible studies will include pregnant women, with a singleton or twin pregnancy, requiring a cervical cerclage, using either the Shirodkar or McDonald technique and run comparative analyses between the two techniques. Randomized control trials (RCT)s, non-randomized control trials, and cohort studies will be eligible. Two independent reviewers will conduct study screening at abstract and full-text level, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Discrepancies will be resolved by a consensus third reviewer if required. Fixed-effects or random-effects models will be used where appropriate to synthesize results. Alternative synthesis methods will be investigated in instances where a meta-analysis is not appropriate, such as summarizing effect estimates, combining P values, vote counting based on direction of effect, or synthesis in narrative form. DISCUSSION: This review will synthesize the evidence on both the Shirodkar and McDonald cerclage method, and will help clinicians and health services to determine and deliver best practice antenatal care that has the potential to make an impact on preterm birth. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO on 25 of May, 2020 with registration number CRD42020177386.

Emergency obstetric simulation training: how do we know where we are going, if we don't know where we have been?

BACKGROUND: Obstetric emergencies contribute significantly to maternal morbidity and mortality. Current training in the management of obstetric emergencies in Australia and internationally focusses on utilising a multidisciplinary simulation-based model. Arguments for and against this type of training exist, using both economic and clinical reasoning. AIMS: To identify the evidence base for the clinical impact of simulation training in obstetric emergencies and to address some of the concerns regarding appropriate delivery of obstetric emergency training in the Australian setting. METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify research undertaken in the area of obstetric emergency training. The initial literature search using broad search terms identified 887 articles which were then reviewed and considered for inclusion if they provided original research with a specific emphasis on the impact of training on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ninety-two articles were identified, comprising evidence in the following clinical situations: eclampsia, shoulder dystocia, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal collapse, cord prolapse and teamwork training. Evidence exists for a benefit in knowledge or skills gained from simulation training and for the benefit of training in small units without access to high-fidelity equipment or facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence exists for a positive impact of training in obstetric emergencies, although the majority of the available evidence applies to evaluation at the level of participants' confidence, knowledge or skills rather than at the level of impact on clinical outcomes. The model of simulation-based training is an appropriate one for the Australian setting and should be further utilised in rural and remote settings.

Prenatal detection and conservative management of a partial fundal uterine dehiscence.

Uterine defects in pregnancy are rare and may pose difficulties in definition and clinical management. Defects involving the myometrium encompass entities such as uterine rupture, dehiscence, sacculation or diverticulum. There are only a few reported cases of uterine fundal defects where the pregnancy continues into the third trimester. The following case describes the prenatal imaging diagnosis and subsequent clinical management of a large fundal uterine defect in the third trimester of pregnancy.

Excisional surgery versus ablative surgery for ovarian endometriomata: a Cochrane Review.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this review was to determine which is the most effective technique for treating an ovarian endometrioma; excision or ablation. METHODS: A systematic review employing the principles of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group was undertaken. No randomized studies of the management of endometriomata by laparotomy were found. Two randomized studies of the laparoscopic management of ovarian endometriomata of >3 cm in size were included. RESULTS: Laparoscopic excision of the cyst wall of the endometrioma was associated with a reduced rate of recurrence of the endometrioma [odds ratio (OR) 0.41, confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.93], reduced requirement for further surgery (OR 0.21, CI 0.05-0.79), reduced recurrence rate of the symptoms of dysmenorrhoea (OR 0.15, CI 0.06-0.38), dyspareunia (OR 0.08, CI 0.01-0.51) and non-menstrual pelvic pain (OR 0.10, CI 0.02-0.56). It was also associated with a subsequently increased rate of spontaneous pregnancy in women who had documented prior subfertility (OR 5.21, CI 2.04-13.29). CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that excisional surgery for endometriomata provides for a more favourable outcome than drainage and ablation, with regard to the recurrence of the endometrioma, recurrence of symptoms and subsequent spontaneous pregnancy in women who were previously subfertile. Consequently this should be the favoured surgical approach. However, we found no data to indicate the best surgical approach in women planning to undergo assisted reproductive techniques.

Long-term success of endometrial resection: in everyday clinical practice, personal audit is more important than the knowledge of how the majority of surgeons perform.

Results of a personal audit of the long-term success of endometrial resection are used for comparison with other published data to demonstrate the importance of personal audit.