Comparaison des différentes stratégies de prises en charge de la grossesse extra-utérine

An ectopic pregnancy is a pregnancy implanted outside uterine cavity. There are four different treatments to manage tubal ectopic pregnancy: expectation, medical treatment (methotrexate), conservative surgery (salpingotomy) and radical surgery (salpingectomy). The choice between these different treatments is based on feasibility criteria (medical treatment and expectation are not feasible in case of tubal rupture). These feasibility criteria can be summarized by activity of ectopic pregnancy. This activity allowed differentiating less active ectopic pregnancies that can be supported by medical treatment and active ectopic pregnancies that required surgery.All of these treatments present advantages and disadvantages and the major unresolved issue concerns subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy. Randomized trial DEMETER has thus been designed to evaluate a difference of 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy and between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. Differences for two years subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy were not more than 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy as between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. This trial also allowed concluding to the superiority of conservative surgery with a systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate compared to medical treatment for management of less active ectopic pregnancy. This superiority might be enhanced by postoperative methotrexate injection. The conversion rate to radical surgery when a conservative surgery is decided is important: 10% for less active ectopic pregnancy and 21% (significantly higher) for active ectopic pregnancy. Recovery time is shorter after conservative surgery compared to medical management.Results of DEMETER trial and literature review allowed giving guidelines for management of ectopic pregnancy. Less active ectopic pregnancy with hCG rate less than 5.000UI/l without tubal rupture or hemodynamic failure can be managed in first intention by medical treatment (methotrexate) if the women is assiduous to a close check. However, conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy is a good option. A systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate in the 24 first hours after surgery should be recommended. Active ectopic pregnancy has to be managed surgically and decision between conservative and radical surgery should be done in the operative room. Finally, women have to be informed about the absence of difference between treatments for subsequent fertility.Une grossesse extra-utérine est une grossesse implantée en dehors de la cavité utérine. Il existe quatre thérapeutiques pour leur prise en charge : l’expectative, le traitement médical par méthotrexate, le traitement chirurgical conservateur (salpingotomie) et le traitement chirurgical radical (salpingectomie). Le choix entre ces 4 traitements repose tout d’abord sur des critères de faisabilité (traitement médical et expectative sont par exemple exclus en cas de rupture tubaire). Ces critères de faisabilité peuvent être résumés par la notion d’activité de la GEU. Cette notion permet de différencier les grossesses extra-utérines peu actives pouvant bénéficier d’un traitement médical des grossesses extra-utérines actives requérant un traitement chirurgical.Chaque traitement présente des avantages et des inconvénients et la principale question toujours en suspens concerne la fertilité après prise en charge d’une GEU. L’essai randomisé DEMETER a donc été conçu pour évaluer l’existence éventuelle d’une différence de fertilité de plus de 20% entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur d’une part pour les GEU peu actives et entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical d’autre part pour les GEU actives.Il n’y a pas de différence significative de plus de 20% de fertilité deux ans après la prise en charge d’une grossesse extra-utérine que ce soit pour les grossesses peu actives entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur ou pour les grossesses actives entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical. Par ailleurs, cet essai a aussi permis de conclure à la supériorité, en terme d’échec immédiat, du traitement chirurgical conservateur avec injection postopératoire de méthotrexate par rapport au traitement médical pour la prise en charge des GEU peu actives. La plus grande efficacité du traitement chirurgical conservateur est probablement majorée par l’injection postopératoire de méthotrexate. Le taux de conversion d’un traitement chirurgical conservateur vers un traitement chirurgical radical est important : 10% dans le groupe des GEU peu actives et 21% (significativement plus élevé) dans le groupe des GEU actives. Enfin, Le délai de guérison est plus court après traitement chirurgical conservateur qu’après traitement médical.Ces résultats couplés aux données de la littérature permettent d’élaborer des recommandations sur la prise en charge des grossesses extra-utérines. Notamment, pour les GEU peu actives avec un taux d’hCG inférieur à 5000UI/ml sans signe de rupture tubaire ou de défaillance hémodynamique, un traitement médical par méthotrexate doit être proposé sous réserve d’une bonne compliance de la patiente pour le suivi. Une prise en charge par chirurgie conservatrice reste une option valide. Dans ce cas, une injection postopératoire de méthotrexate sera réalisée systématiquement dans les 24 heures suivant l’intervention. Le traitement des GEU actives est chirurgical et la décision entre conservateur et radical a lieu en peropératoire. Enfin, une information aux patientes pourra être délivrée sur l’absence de différence de fertilité 2 ans après le traitement d’une GEU

A protocol for developing a core outcome set for ectopic pregnancy

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ectopic pregnancy have reported many different outcomes, which are themselves often defined and measured in distinct ways. This level of variation results in an inability to compare results of individual RCTs. The development of a core outcome set to ensure outcomes important to key stakeholders are collected consistently will guide future research in ectopic pregnancy. STUDY AIM: To develop and implement a core outcome set to guide future research in ectopic pregnancy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We have established an international steering group of key stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, researchers, and individuals with lived experience of ectopic pregnancy. We will identify potential outcomes from ectopic pregnancy from a comprehensive literature review of published randomised controlled trials. We will then utilise a modified Delphi method to prioritise outcomes. Subsequently, key stakeholders will be invited to score potential core outcomes on a nine-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not important) to 9 (critical). Repeated reflection and rescoring should promote whole and individual stakeholder group convergence towards consensus ‘core’ outcomes. We will also establish standardised definitions and recommend high-quality measurements for individual core outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: COMET 1492. Registered in November 2019

Do Surgeons Anticipate Women’s Hopes and Fears Associated with Prolapse Repair? A Qualitative Analysis in the PROSPERE Trial

Women’s preoperative perceptions of pelvic-floor disorders may differ from those of their physicians. Our objective was to specify women’s hopes and fears before cystocele repair, and to compare them to those that surgeons anticipate. We performed a secondary qualitative analysis of data from the PROSPERE trial. Among the 265 women included, 98% reported at least one hope and 86% one fear before surgery. Sixteen surgeons also completed the free expectations-questionnaire as a typical patient would. Women’s hopes covered seven themes, and women’s fears eleven. Women’s hopes were concerning prolapse repair (60%), improvement of urinary function (39%), capacity for physical activities (28%), sexual function (27%), well-being (25%), and end of pain or heaviness (19%). Women’s fears were concerning prolapse relapse (38%), perioperative concerns (28%), urinary disorders (26%), pain (19%), sexual problems (10%), and physical impairment (6%). Surgeons anticipated typical hopes and fears which were very similar to those the majority of women reported. However, only 60% of the women reported prolapse repair as an expectation. Women’s expectations appear reasonable and consistent with the scientific literature on the improvement and the risk of relapse or complication related to cystocele repair. Our analysis encourages surgeons to consider individual woman’s expectations before pelvic-floor repair

Comparison of Different Managements of Ectopic Pregnancy

Une grossesse extra-utérine est une grossesse implantée en dehors de la cavité utérine. Il existe quatre thérapeutiques pour leur prise en charge : l’expectative, le traitement médical par méthotrexate, le traitement chirurgical conservateur (salpingotomie) et le traitement chirurgical radical (salpingectomie). Le choix entre ces 4 traitements repose tout d’abord sur des critères de faisabilité (traitement médical et expectative sont par exemple exclus en cas de rupture tubaire). Ces critères de faisabilité peuvent être résumés par la notion d’activité de la GEU. Cette notion permet de différencier les grossesses extra-utérines peu actives pouvant bénéficier d’un traitement médical des grossesses extra-utérines actives requérant un traitement chirurgical.Chaque traitement présente des avantages et des inconvénients et la principale question toujours en suspens concerne la fertilité après prise en charge d’une GEU. L’essai randomisé DEMETER a donc été conçu pour évaluer l’existence éventuelle d’une différence de fertilité de plus de 20% entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur d’une part pour les GEU peu actives et entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical d’autre part pour les GEU actives.Il n’y a pas de différence significative de plus de 20% de fertilité deux ans après la prise en charge d’une grossesse extra-utérine que ce soit pour les grossesses peu actives entre traitement médical et traitement chirurgical conservateur ou pour les grossesses actives entre traitement chirurgical conservateur et radical. Par ailleurs, cet essai a aussi permis de conclure à la supériorité, en terme d’échec immédiat, du traitement chirurgical conservateur avec injection postopératoire de méthotrexate par rapport au traitement médical pour la prise en charge des GEU peu actives. La plus grande efficacité du traitement chirurgical conservateur est probablement majorée par l’injection postopératoire de méthotrexate. Le taux de conversion d’un traitement chirurgical conservateur vers un traitement chirurgical radical est important : 10% dans le groupe des GEU peu actives et 21% (significativement plus élevé) dans le groupe des GEU actives. Enfin, Le délai de guérison est plus court après traitement chirurgical conservateur qu’après traitement médical.Ces résultats couplés aux données de la littérature permettent d’élaborer des recommandations sur la prise en charge des grossesses extra-utérines. Notamment, pour les GEU peu actives avec un taux d’hCG inférieur à 5000UI/ml sans signe de rupture tubaire ou de défaillance hémodynamique, un traitement médical par méthotrexate doit être proposé sous réserve d’une bonne compliance de la patiente pour le suivi. Une prise en charge par chirurgie conservatrice reste une option valide. Dans ce cas, une injection postopératoire de méthotrexate sera réalisée systématiquement dans les 24 heures suivant l’intervention. Le traitement des GEU actives est chirurgical et la décision entre conservateur et radical a lieu en peropératoire. Enfin, une information aux patientes pourra être délivrée sur l’absence de différence de fertilité 2 ans après le traitement d’une GEU.An ectopic pregnancy is a pregnancy implanted outside uterine cavity. There are four different treatments to manage tubal ectopic pregnancy: expectation, medical treatment (methotrexate), conservative surgery (salpingotomy) and radical surgery (salpingectomy). The choice between these different treatments is based on feasibility criteria (medical treatment and expectation are not feasible in case of tubal rupture). These feasibility criteria can be summarized by activity of ectopic pregnancy. This activity allowed differentiating less active ectopic pregnancies that can be supported by medical treatment and active ectopic pregnancies that required surgery.All of these treatments present advantages and disadvantages and the major unresolved issue concerns subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy. Randomized trial DEMETER has thus been designed to evaluate a difference of 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy and between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. Differences for two years subsequent fertility after management of ectopic pregnancy were not more than 20% between medical management and conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy as between conservative and radical surgery for active ectopic pregnancy. This trial also allowed concluding to the superiority of conservative surgery with a systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate compared to medical treatment for management of less active ectopic pregnancy. This superiority might be enhanced by postoperative methotrexate injection. The conversion rate to radical surgery when a conservative surgery is decided is important: 10% for less active ectopic pregnancy and 21% (significantly higher) for active ectopic pregnancy. Recovery time is shorter after conservative surgery compared to medical management.Results of DEMETER trial and literature review allowed giving guidelines for management of ectopic pregnancy. Less active ectopic pregnancy with hCG rate less than 5.000UI/l without tubal rupture or hemodynamic failure can be managed in first intention by medical treatment (methotrexate) if the women is assiduous to a close check. However, conservative surgery for less active ectopic pregnancy is a good option. A systematic postoperative injection of methotrexate in the 24 first hours after surgery should be recommended. Active ectopic pregnancy has to be managed surgically and decision between conservative and radical surgery should be done in the operative room. Finally, women have to be informed about the absence of difference between treatments for subsequent fertility

Further evidence that endometriosis is related to tubal and ovarian cancers: A study of 271,444 inpatient women

International audienceObjective: To evaluate associations between endometriosis and tubal and ovarian cancers in a large population-based study. Methods: The Health Care Cost and Utilization Project – National Inpatient Sample databases from 2005 to 2014 were used in this study. Data on patients with a diagnosis of tubal or ovarian cancer and endometriosis (overall and subtypes including adenomyosis and pelvic endometriosis) using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification codes were extracted. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations between tubal and ovarian cancers and endometriosis. Adjustment was made for age, race, median income level, payment plan, hospital location and obesity. Results: Of 38,800,139 women aged >18 years who were hospitalized between 2005 and 2014, 271,444 women with adenomyosis and/or pelvic endometriosis, 4289 women with tubal cancer and 133,253 women with ovarian cancer were identified. The rate of tubal cancer was three-fold higher in women with endometriosis compared with women without endometriosis (0.03 % vs 0.01 %). The odds ratio (OR) adjusted for age, race, obesity, income and insurance type was 4.02 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.17–5.11; p < 0.01]. The rate of tubal cancer was higher in women with adenomyosis (0.04 % vs 0.01 %; adjusted OR 4.88, 95 % CI 3.66–6.50; p < 0.01) and women with pelvic endometriosis (0.02 % vs 0.01 %; adjusted OR 2.80, 95 % CI 1.84–4.27; p < 0.01) compared with women without these conditions. Similar associations were found between ovarian cancer and pelvic endometriosis and ovarian cancer and adenomyosis. Conclusion: Both pelvic endometriosis and adenomyosis are strongly associated with tubal and ovarian cancers

Gender awareness among general practitioners in France: a cross sectional study using the Nijmegen Gender Awareness in Medicine Scale (N-GAMS)

Abstract Gender is a key determinant of health and healthcare use. The question of whether physicians are aware of gender issues is important to avoid gender bias in medical practice. This study aimed to validate the Nijmegen Gender Awareness in Medicine Scale (N-GAMS) in a representative population of French general practitioners (GPs) and to analyze their gender sensitivity and the presence of gender stereotypes among them. The N-GAMS, already validated in medical students, measures gender awareness through 3 subscores: gender sensitivity (GS) and gender-role ideology towards patients (GRIP) and doctors (GRID) (gender stereotypes). After translation into French, it was distributed to 900 GPs. The scale was validated through exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Psychometric properties were tested. Multivariate linear regressions were conducted to explore the associations between GPs’ characteristics and N-GAMS subscores. EFA identified 3 meaningful factors consistent with prior theory. Subscores exhibited good internal consistency. The main findings were that GRIP was significantly higher in older physicians, in male physicians, among those who less involved their patients in decisions, and those who were not training supervisors. For GRID, results were quite similar to those of GRIP. GS was significantly higher for physicians working in health centres or medical homes and for those with gynecological practices but lower when they less involved patients in medical decisions. This study suggests that it is necessary to teach gender issues not only in medical schools but also as part of continuing medical education

Surgical removal of essure® micro inserts by vaginal hysterectomy or laparoscopic salpingectomy with cornuectomy: Case series and follow up survey about device-attributed symptoms resolution

International audienceIntroduction: Inserts Essure® were used as a definitive sterilization method from 2001 to 2017. They have been used for more than 750,000 procedures. Gynecological or extra gynaecological adverse events have been reported by patients. The objective of the study is to evaluate the resolution of symptoms attributed to Essure® micro-inserts after surgical removal.Methods: Monocentric retrospective study. Patients who had surgical removal of Essure® micro-inserts between January 2017 and April 2019 were included. The removal was performed by bilateral salpingectomy with cornuectomy by laparoscopy or vaginal hysterectomy. Symptoms were reported preoperatively, 4-8 weeks after withdrawal (early assessment) and 6-24 months after withdrawal (later assessment).Results: Ninety patients had a surgical removal of Essure® micro-inserts. Fifty-two vaginal hysterectomies and thirty-five laparoscopic salpingectomies were performed. The main symptoms reported are pelvic pain (70 %), fatigue (66.7 %) and heavy bleeding menstruations (53.3 %). One month after surgery, 46.7 % of patients have a major improvement of symptoms and 51.1 % a partial resolution. The major improvement rate is not significantly different between laparoscopic salpingectomy and vaginal hysterectomy (51.5 % versus 42.3 %) (p = 0.23). At 24 months, results improved with 83.3 % major improvement.Conclusion: Surgical removal may be effective for treating most women with attributed device symptoms. Vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic salpingectomy with cornuectomy seem to have an equivalent rate for the resolution of extra-gynecological symptoms

Study of uterus healing after cesarean section and improvement by support techniques.

International audienc

Vaginal posterior isthmic sling: A report of 53 cases

International audienceIntroduction: Sacrospinofixation is used for fundic vaginal vault's prolapse or to prevent mid-level or posterior prolapse. It can lead to complications such as dyspareunia, chronic pain, and quality of life impairment. Anchoring a posterior isthmic sling to the two sacrospinous ligaments is an alternative to classic Richter's sacrospinofixation. Objective of this study is to report the first cases of vaginal posterior isthmic slings. Methods: This study is retrospective and unicentric. It includes women who had posterior isthmic sling at the time of a surgery with a mesh for anterior prolapse by vaginal way between 2010 and 2016 in the gynecologic department of a teaching hospital. Report of efficacy and tolerance was performed. Results: Between 2010 and 2016, 53 women were included with a posterior isthmic sling and a mesh for an anterior prolapse. POP-Q evolution during the follow-up in the posterior isthmic sling group assess of a good efficacy of the sling. Four women (7.5%) required second surgery in 28 months following initial surgery (only 1 for excision). Four women (7.5%) had a prolapse recurrence in a mean time of 30 months without recurrent surgery. Women's satisfaction level was high (8.0/10 [7,1–8,8]). Conclusion: Efficacy and tolerance of the posterior isthmic sling seems good. It might then be an option for mid-level prolapses in case of vaginal surgery with mesh for anterior prolapse. A non-inferiority trial should be performed to be able to conclude on the place of this alternative to Richter's sacrospinofixation