Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Obstet Gynecol ; 143(6): e149-e152, 2024 Jun 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38574363

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, a variety of long-COVID-19 symptoms and autoimmune complications have been recognized. CASES: We report three cases of autoimmune premature poor ovarian response in patients aged 30-37 years after mild to asymptomatic COVID-19 before vaccination, with nucleotide antibody confirmation. Two patients failed to respond to maximum-dose gonadotropins for more than 4 weeks, despite a recent history of response before having COVID-19. After a month of prednisone 30 mg, these two patients had normal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels, high oocyte yield, and blastocyst formation in successful in vitro fertilization cycles. All three patients have above-average anti-müllerian hormone levels that persisted throughout their clinical ovarian insufficiency. Two patients had elevated FSH levels, perhaps resulting from FSH receptor blockade. One patient, with a history of high response to gonadotropins 75 international units per day and below-normal FSH levels, had no ovarian response to more than a month of gonadotropins (525 international units daily), suggesting autoimmune block of the FSH glycoprotein and possible FSH receptor blockade. CONCLUSION: Auto-antibody production in response to COVID-19 before vaccination may be a rare cause of autoimmune poor ovarian response. Although vaccination is likely protective, further study will be required to evaluate the effect of vaccination and duration of autoimmune FSH or FSH receptor blockade.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Insuficiência Ovariana Primária , Receptores do FSH , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , COVID-19/imunologia , COVID-19/complicações , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/sangue , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Insuficiência Ovariana Primária/imunologia , Insuficiência Ovariana Primária/tratamento farmacológico , Receptores do FSH/antagonistas & inibidores , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia
2.
F S Rep ; 5(2): 205-210, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38983743

RESUMO

Objective: To compare women with proximal tubal obstruction (PTO) undergoing hysteroscopic tubal cannulation with fluoroscopic guidance vs. laparoscopic guidance. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: All fluoroscopically-guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulations were performed in an ambulatory suite. All laparoscopically-guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulations were performed in a hospital operating room. Patients: Infertile women with unilateral or bilateral PTO on hysterosalpingography who failed selective salpingography in the radiology suite and had a planned laparoscopy or hysteroscopy in the operating room for defects seen on sonohysterography were studied. Intervention: All women had a Novy catheter system positioned hysteroscopically to cannulate the occluded fallopian tube(s). Women undergoing fluoroscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation (FHTC), which used contrast and C-arm pelvic imaging at an ambulatory center, were compared with those undergoing hospital-based laparoscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation (LHTC) with laparoscopic visualization. Main Outcome Measurements: Tubal cannulation success; bilateral cannulation success; tubal perforations; post-FHTC non-in vitro fertilization (non-IVF) intrauterine pregnancies; days from procedure to pregnancy for non-IVF intrauterine pregnancies; and time to non-IVF pregnancy hazards ratio. Results: A total of 76 infertile women undergoing either FHTC (34 women) or LHTC (42 women) between 2015 and 2019 were included. Demographic variables were similar among the 2 groups. A total of 31 (92%) of 34 of patients undergoing FHTC and 36 (86%) of 42 of patients undergoing LHTC had at least one tube successfully cannulated. In total, 30 (78%) of 34 of patients undergoing FHTC and 32 (79%) of 42 patients undergoing LHTC had all occluded tubes successfully cannulated. Tubal perforation occurred in 1 (3%) of 34 FHTC cases and 3 (7%) of 42 LHTC cases. A similar percentage of non-IVF treatment-induced intrauterine pregnancies were achieved in the FHTC and LHTC groups (10/34 [29%] vs. 12/42 [29%]). Among patients who conceived without IVF, time from procedure to pregnancy was lower in the FHTC group (101 ± 124.6 days) compared with the LHTC group (228 ± 216 days). There was a significant difference in time to pregnancy when only those who conceived were considered (hazard ratio, 9.39; 95% confidence interval, 2.42-36.51); however, there was no significant difference when all subjects regardless of pregnancy outcome were analyzed (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-3.446). Conclusion: Fluoroscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation is a safe, effective, incision free procedure that results in comparable rates of tubal patency and intrauterine pregnancies as LHTC. This technique should be considered in women undergoing treatment of PTO when operative laparoscopy is not otherwise indicated.

3.
Obstet Gynecol ; 141(2): 268-283, 2023 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36649334

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To explore how permanent compared with absorbable suture affects anatomic success in native tissue vaginal suspension (uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament suspension) and sacrocolpopexy with mesh. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through March 29, 2022. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Our population included women undergoing apical prolapse surgery (uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament suspension and abdominal sacrocolpopexy). Our intervention was permanent suture for apical prolapse surgery, and our comparator was absorbable suture. We determined a single anatomic success proportion per study. Adverse events collected included suture and mesh exposure, surgery for suture and mesh complication, dyspareunia, and granulation tissue. Abstracts were doubly screened, full-text articles were doubly screened, and accepted articles were doubly extracted. Quality of studies was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. In single-arm studies using either permanent or absorbable suture, random effects meta-analyses of pooled proportions were used to assess anatomic success. In comparative studies investigating both suture types, random effects meta-analyses of pooled risk ratios were used. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Of 4,658 abstracts screened, 398 full-text articles were assessed and 63 studies were included (24 vaginal suspension [13 uterosacral ligament suspension and 11 sacrospinous ligament suspension] and 39 sacrocolpopexy). At 2-year follow-up, there was no difference in permanent compared with absorbable suture in uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament suspension (proportional anatomic success rate 88% [95% CI 0.81-0.93] vs 88% [95% CI 0.82-0.92]). Similarly, at 18-month follow-up, there was no difference in permanent compared with absorbable suture in sacrocolpopexy (proportional anatomic success rate 92% [95% CI 0.88-0.95] vs 96% [95% CI 0.92-0.99]). On meta-analysis, there was no difference in relative risk (RR) of success for permanent compared with absorbable suture for uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament suspension (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.93-1.33) or sacrocolpopexy (RR 1.00, 95% CI0.98-1.03). CONCLUSION: Success rates were similarly high for absorbable and permanent suture after uterosacral ligament suspension, sacrospinous ligament suspension, and sacrocolpopexy, with medium-term follow-up. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021265848.


Assuntos
Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico , Prolapso Uterino , Feminino , Humanos , Útero/cirurgia , Prolapso Uterino/cirurgia , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/métodos , Ligamentos/cirurgia , Suturas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA