Utility of a routine ultrasound for detection of ectopic pregnancies among women requesting abortion:A retrospective review

INTRODUCTION: Routine ultrasound may be used in abortion services to determine gestational age and confirm an intrauterine pregnancy. However, ultrasound adds complexity to care and results may be inconclusive, delaying abortion. We sought to determine the rate of ectopic pregnancy and the utility of routine ultrasound in its detection, in a community abortion service. METHODS: Retrospective case record review of women requesting abortion over a 5-year period (2015–2019) with an outcome of ectopic pregnancy or pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) at a service (Edinburgh, UK) conducting routine ultrasound on all women. Records were searched for symptoms at presentation, development of symptoms during clinical care, significant risk factors and routine ultrasound findings. RESULTS: Only 29/11 381 women (0.25%, 95% CI 0.18%, 0.33%) had an ectopic pregnancy or PUL (tubal=18, caesarean scar=1, heterotopic=1, PUL=9). Eleven (38%) cases had either symptoms at presentation (n=8) and/or significant risk factors for ectopic pregnancy (n=4). A further 12 women developed symptoms during their clinical care. Of the remaining six, three were PUL treated with methotrexate and three were ectopic (salpingectomy=2, methotrexate=1). In three cases, the baseline ultrasound indicated a probable early intrauterine pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Ectopic pregnancies are uncommon among women presenting for abortion. The value of routine ultrasound in excluding ectopic pregnancy in symptom-free women without significant risk factors is questionable as it may aid detection of some cases but may provide false reassurance that a pregnancy is intrauterine

Timing of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination and Effects on Menstrual Cycle Changes

Objective: To assess whether menstrual cycle timing (follicular or luteal phase) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration is associated with cycle length changes.Methods: We used prospectively collected (2021-2022) menstrual cycle tracking data from 19,497 reproductive-aged users of the application "Natural Cycles." We identified whether vaccine was delivered in the follicular or luteal phase and also included an unvaccinated control group. Our primary outcome was the adjusted within-individual change in cycle length (in days) from the average of the three menstrual cycles before the first vaccination cycle (individuals in the unvaccinated control group were assigned a notional vaccine date). We also assessed cycle length changes in the second vaccination cycle and whether a clinically significant change in cycle length (8 days or more) occurred in either cycle.Results: Most individuals were younger than age 35 years (80.1%) and from North America (28.6%), continental Europe (33.5%), or the United Kingdom (31.7%). In the vaccinated group, the majority received an mRNA vaccine (63.8% of the full sample). Individuals vaccinated in the follicular phase experienced an average 1-day longer adjusted cycle length with a first or second dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with their prevaccination average (first dose: 1.00 day [98.75% CI, 0.88-1.13], second dose: 1.11 days [98.75% CI, 0.93-1.29]); those vaccinated in the luteal phase and those in the unvaccinated control group experienced no change in cycle length (respectively, first dose: -0.09 days [98.75% CI, -0.26 to 0.07], second dose: 0.06 days [98.75% CI, -0.16 to 0.29], unvaccinated notional first dose: 0.08 days [98.75% CI, -0.10 to 0.27], second dose: 0.17 days [98.75% CI, -0.04 to 0.38]). Those vaccinated during the follicular phase were also more likely to experience a clinically significant change in cycle length (8 days or more; first dose: 6.8%) than those vaccinated in the luteal phase or unvaccinated (3.3% and 5.0%, respectively; P <.001).Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine-related cycle length increases are associated with receipt of vaccination in the first half of the menstrual cycle (follicular phase)

Use of effective contraception following provision of the progestogen-only pill for women presenting to community pharmacies for emergency contraception (Bridge-It):a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND:Unless women start effective contraception after oral emergency contraception, they remain at risk of unintended pregnancy. Most women in the UK obtain emergency contraception from community pharmacies. We hypothesised that pharmacist provision of the progestogen-only pill as a bridging interim method of contraception with emergency contraception plus an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, in which all methods of contraception are available, would result in increased subsequent use of effective contraception. METHODS:We did a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial in 29 UK pharmacies among women receiving levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Women aged 16 years or older, not already using hormonal contraception, not on medication that could interfere with the progestogen-only pill, and willing to give contact details for follow-up were invited to participate. In the intervention group, women received a 3-month supply of the progestogen-only pill (75 μg desogestrel) plus a rapid access card to a participating sexual and reproductive health clinic. In the control group, pharmacists advised women to attend their usual contraceptive provider. The order in which each pharmacy provided the intervention or control was randomly assigned using a computer software algorithm. The primary outcome was the use of effective contraception (hormonal or intrauterine) at 4 months. This study is registered, ISRCTN70616901 (complete). FINDINGS:Between Dec 19, 2017, and June 26, 2019, 636 women were recruited to the intervention group (316 [49·6%], mean age 22·7 years [SD 5·7]) or the control group (320 [50·3%], 22·6 years [5·1]). Three women (one in the intervention group and two in the control group) were excluded after randomisation. 4-month follow-up data were available for 406 (64%) participants, 25 were lost to follow-up, and two participants no longer wanted to participate in the study. The proportion of women using effective contraception was 20·1% greater (95% CI 5·2-35·0) in the intervention group (mean 58·4%, 48·6-68·2), than in the control group (mean 40·5%, 29·7-51·3 [adjusted for recruitment period, treatment group, and centre]; p=0·011).The difference remained significant after adjusting for age, current sexual relationship, and history of effective contraception use, and was robust to the effect of missing data (assuming missingness at random). No serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION:Provision of a supply of the progestogen-only pill with emergency contraception from a community pharmacist, along with an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, results in a clinically meaningful increase in subsequent use of effective contraception. Widely implemented, this practice could prevent unintended pregnancies after use of emergency contraception. FUNDING:National Institute for Health Research (Health Technology Assessment Programme project 15/113/01)

Provision of the progestogen-only pill by community pharmacies as bridging contraception for women receiving emergency contraception:the Bridge-it RCT

Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 27. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The role of healthcare providers in HPV vaccination programs - A meeting report

The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Prevention and Control Board convened a meeting in Bucharest, Romania (May 2018), to discuss the role of healthcare providers (HCPs) in prevention programs, with a focus on HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening. International and local experts discussed the role that HCPs can play to increase the uptake of HPV vaccine and screening. Experts recommended: 1) increasing HCP norms of getting vaccinated; 2) training providers to make effective recommendations; 3) making culturally appropriate materials available, in local languages; and 4) centralizing and coordinating education and information material, to direct both HCPs and the general public to the best material available

Relations between lipoprotein(a) concentrations, LPA genetic variants, and the risk of mortality in patients with established coronary heart disease: a molecular and genetic association study

Background: Lipoprotein(a) concentrations in plasma are associated with cardiovascular risk in the general population. Whether lipoprotein(a) concentrations or LPA genetic variants predict long-term mortality in patients with established coronary heart disease remains less clear. Methods: We obtained data from 3313 patients with established coronary heart disease in the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health (LURIC) study. We tested associations of tertiles of lipoprotein(a) concentration in plasma and two LPA single-nucleotide polymorphisms ([SNPs] rs10455872 and rs3798220) with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality by Cox regression analysis and with severity of disease by generalised linear modelling, with and without adjustment for age, sex, diabetes diagnosis, systolic blood pressure, BMI, smoking status, estimated glomerular filtration rate, LDL-cholesterol concentration, and use of lipid-lowering therapy. Results for plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations were validated in five independent studies involving 10 195 patients with established coronary heart disease. Results for genetic associations were replicated through large-scale collaborative analysis in the GENIUS-CHD consortium, comprising 106 353 patients with established coronary heart disease and 19 332 deaths in 22 studies or cohorts. Findings: The median follow-up was 9·9 years. Increased severity of coronary heart disease was associated with lipoprotein(a) concentrations in plasma in the highest tertile (adjusted hazard radio [HR] 1·44, 95% CI 1·14–1·83) and the presence of either LPA SNP (1·88, 1·40–2·53). No associations were found in LURIC with all-cause mortality (highest tertile of lipoprotein(a) concentration in plasma 0·95, 0·81–1·11 and either LPA SNP 1·10, 0·92–1·31) or cardiovascular mortality (0·99, 0·81–1·2 and 1·13, 0·90–1·40, respectively) or in the validation studies. Interpretation: In patients with prevalent coronary heart disease, lipoprotein(a) concentrations and genetic variants showed no associations with mortality. We conclude that these variables are not useful risk factors to measure to predict progression to death after coronary heart disease is established. Funding: Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technical Development (AtheroRemo and RiskyCAD), INTERREG IV Oberrhein Programme, Deutsche Nierenstiftung, Else-Kroener Fresenius Foundation, Deutsche Stiftung für Herzforschung, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Saarland University, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Willy Robert Pitzer Foundation, and Waldburg-Zeil Clinics Isny