(searched for: 10.29328/journal.cjog.1001076)
Published: 1 August 2021
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia / RBGO Gynecology and Obstetrics, Volume 43, pp 627-637; https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1733999
Objective To compare the effects of expectant versus interventionist care in the management of pregnant women with severe preeclampsia remote from term. Data sources An electronic search was conducted in the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS, for its Spanish acronym), World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP), and OpenGrey databases. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO, for its French acronym), Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and Colombian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CJOG) websites were searched for conference proceedings, without language restrictions, up to March 25, 2020. Selection of studies Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and non-randomized controlled studies (NRSs) were included. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of the evidence. Data collection Studies were independently assessed for inclusion criteria, data extraction, and risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data synthesis Four RCTs and six NRS were included. Low-quality evidence from the RCTs showed that expectant care may result in a lower incidence of appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration (Apgar) scores < 7 at 5 minutes (risk ratio [RR]: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.23%to 0.99) and a higher average birth weight (mean difference [MD]: 254.7 g; 95%CI: 98.5 g to 410.9 g). Very low quality evidence from the NRSs suggested that expectant care might decrease the rates of neonatal death (RR: 0.42; 95%CI 0.22 to 0.80), hyaline membrane disease (RR: 0.59; 95%CI: 0.40 to 0.87), and admission to neonatal care (RR: 0.73; 95%CI: 0.54 to 0.99). No maternal or fetal differences were found for other perinatal outcomes. Conclusion Compared with interventionist management, expectant care may improve neonatal outcomes without increasing maternal morbidity and mortality.
Published: 12 January 2021
Clinical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Volume 4, pp 003-006; https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.cjog.1001076
Aims: To audit the use of cervical dilators, local anaesthetic, and failure rates in outpatient hysteroscopy over a two-year period in University Hospital Kerry. To review the experiences of women attending the outpatient hysteroscopy clinic (OHC) over a two-year period in University Hospital Kerry. Methods: Retrospective data review was carried out. Green-top Guideline No. 59: Best Practice in Outpatient Hysteroscopy, published by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), was the standard used for comparison. Results: Two hundred and twenty women were seen over a two-year period. The average age was forty-eight. The most common complaint being of menorrhagia/irregular bleeding per vaginum (PV). Local anaesthetic was used in just under one third of cases of which half required cervical dilatation. Most women reported experiencing mild to moderate levels of discomfort however most would opt for an outpatient hysteroscopic procedure again if required. Discussion/Conclusion: Outpatient hysteroscopy is a well-tolerated and safe procedure. Suitability for outpatient hysteroscopy is not predictable based on parity of menopausal status. Women would elect to undergo outpatient hysteroscopy again if required and this is likely due to several reasons including convenience and lack of requirement for general anaesthetic.