"Does the use of gestation-specific centiles for cervical length change the management of pregnancies at risk of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth?"

INTRODUCTION: Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Spontaneous Preterm Birth (sPTB) has many and varied causes but is known to be strongly associated with a short or shortening cervix in the midtrimester of pregnancy. The strongest risk factor for sPTB is a previous sPTB. In women with a history of sPTB, we can offer surveillance and treatments which have been proven to reduce the risk of sPTB, such as cervical cerclage and vaginal progesterone supplementation. Alongside other indications, we currently use 25 mm or shorter as a "trigger threshold" for offering cervical cerclage treatment in the Preterm Birth Prevention Clinic at The National Maternity Hospital. AIM: To determine if using gestation-specific centiles instead of a 25 mm cut-off for cervical length changes the antenatal management of women at high risk of sPTB. METHOD: This was a retrospective chart review of all women attending the preterm birth clinic over the 2-year period 2018-2020 in a large tertiary referral unit in Dublin, Ireland. Demographic details, obstetric history, preterm birth risk factors and preventative treatments offered were collected and analysed. Cervical lengths were measured with ultrasound using a standardised protocol and all performed or supervised by 2 experienced sonographers. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients with known risk factors for sPTB attended the Preterm Birth Surveillance Clinic at the National Maternity Hospital during the study period. Of these, 36/200 (18%) went on to deliver again prior to 37 weeks despite attending the clinic +/- receiving interventions & this group are the focus of this paper. The indications for surveillance in this group that had a recurrent sPTB included recurrent second-trimester pregnancy losses/preterm delivery < 34 weeks (26/36 (72%)), cervical trauma (including treatment of CIN) (12/36 (33%)), congenital abnormalities (1/36 (2.8%)), uterine anomaly (1/36 (2.8%)) and placental bleeding (1/36 (2.8%)). There was one smoker in this series. Funnelling was observed in 3/36 cases (8.3%). Of the 36 patients, an additional 15 would have received a cerclage had gestation-specific centiles, i.e., <5th centile, been used and an additional 10/36 (28%) would have been offered progesterone therapy. CONCLUSION: In those at high risk of preterm birth, the use of gestation-specific centiles for cervical length increases the proportion of patients that would be eligible for cervical cerclage. It is unclear whether this would change clinical outcome.

Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery: Feasibility and Outcomes in a National Bariatric Centre.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess outcomes of bariatric surgical procedures after the implementation of an enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocol in the National Bariatric Centre in Ireland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on consecutive bariatric procedures performed over a 36-month period was prospectively recorded. ERABS interventions utilized included preoperative counselling, shortened preoperative fasts, specific anaesthetic protocols, early postop mobilization and feeding, and extended post-discharge thromboprophylaxis. RESULTS: A total of 280 primary bariatric procedures were performed over a 36-month period. The primary procedures were laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (57.5%), laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (33.2%) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (9.3%). Mean (SD) age was 48 (± 10) years, mean (SD) preoperative BMI 49.5 (± 9) kg/m2 and 68% were female. Median ASA score was 3, and median OSMRS also 3. Over 50% of patients had a diagnosis of hypertension or OSA, and over one-third had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus or dyslipidemia. All procedures were completed laparoscopically and 29 patients underwent a simultaneous procedure. The mean (SD) length of stay was 2.3 (± 1.4) days (median 2 days, range 2-47 days). Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 10.0% (n = 29). The 30-day readmission and reoperation rates were 3.6% and 2.5% respectively. There was no mortality recorded in this series. CONCLUSION: Implementing an ERABS protocol was feasible, safe, associated with low morbidity, no mortality, acceptable LOS and low readmission and reoperation rates. Although patients with obesity have a spectrum of disease-related complications, this should not preclude the use of an ERABS protocol in bariatric surgery.