Electronic Continuous Pain Measurement vs Verbal Rating Scale in gynaecology:A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE: To compare pain measured with a new electronic device - the Continuous Pain Score Meter (CPSM) - and the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) during gynaecological procedures in an outpatient setting, and to correlate these outcomes with baseline anxiety and patient (in)tolerance to the procedure. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective cohort study was undertaken in two centres: a university hospital and a large teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Patients undergoing an outpatient hysteroscopy, colposcopy or ovum pick-up procedure for in-vitro fertilization in one of the two participating hospitals with availability of the CPSM were included. Pain was measured by both the CPSM and the VRS. Patient tolerance to the procedure was reported. Various outcomes of the CPSM were compared with those of the VRS and related to baseline anxiety scores. RESULTS: Ninety-one of 108 included patients (84 %) used the CPSM correctly during the procedure, and it was possible to analyse the CPSM scores for 87 women (81 %). The CPSM scores were all linearly related to the VRS. The peak pain score on the CPSM (CPSM-PPS) had the strongest correlation with the VRS score for all three procedures. Higher CPSM-PPS was related to patient (in)tolerance to the procedure (p = 0.03-0.002). Anxiety at baseline was not correlated with pain perception, except for VRS during colposcopy (r = 0.39, p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients were able to use the CPSM correctly, resulting in detailed information on pain perception for each individual pain stimulus during three outpatient gynaecological procedures. The CPSM-PPS had the strongest correlation with the VRS score and patient (in)tolerance to the procedure

Can prolonged sick leave after gynecologic surgery be predicted? An observational study in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: Sick leave frequently has been used as an outcome to evaluate minimal invasive surgery compared with conventional open surgery. However, sick leave is determined not only by the surgical approach. Recently, a postoperative recovery-specific quality-of-life questionnaire, the Recovery Index (RI-10), has been developed and validated. This study investigated the relation of the Recovery Index 10, the RI-6 (a subset of 6 questions), and the type of surgery to sick leave. METHODS: The study enrolled 46 patients with a paid job scheduled for elective gynecologic surgery, who filled out the RI-10. After 8 weeks, the patients were approached by telephone to give information on their return to work. RESULTS: Of the 46 patients, 23 (50%) returned to work completely after 8 weeks, 14 (30%) resumed work partly, and 9 (20%) did not resume work at all. In the analysis, the patients who completely returned to work were compared with those who did not return or partially returned. Recovery as expressed in the RI-6 improved with time after surgery. It appeared that the measurement 2 weeks after surgery showed the best discriminative capacity to predict sick leave after 8 weeks, with an area under the curve of 0.88 (confidence interval, 0.74-1.03). The subjective postoperative recovery as expressed by the RI-6 is more closely related to the type of surgery (p = 0.001) sick leave is (p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The subjective recovery scored by the patient on a questionnaire of six questions is a better outcome than sick leave for evaluating surgical approaches. If administered 2 weeks after surgery, it may predict prolonged sick leav

Considerations on implementation of the newest treatment for symptomatic uterine fibroids : oral GnRH antagonists

Peer reviewe

Corrigendum: Septum resection in women with a septate uterus:a cohort study

The authors of the above article would like to apologise for an error in one of the authors' names. W. Kuchenbecker should be W.K.H. Kuchenbecker, as above. The electronic version of this article has been updated at https:// doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez284. The print version is correct. The Authors would like to assure readers that this does not affect any other content of the article.</p

Septum resection in women with a septate uterus : a cohort study

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

First-trimester cesarean scar pregnancy: a comparative analysis of treatment options from the international registry

Background: A cesarean scar pregnancy is an iatrogenic consequence of a previous cesarean delivery. The gestational sac implants into a niche created by the incision of the previous cesarean delivery, and this carries a substantial risk for major maternal complications. The aim of this study was to report, analyze, and compare the effectiveness and safety of different treatments options for cesarean scar pregnancies managed in the first trimester through a registry. Objective: This study aimed to evaluated the ultrasound findings, disease behavior, and management of first-trimester cesarean scar pregnancies. Study design: We created an international registry of cesarean scar pregnancy cases to study the ultrasound findings, disease behavior, and management of cesarean scar pregnancies. The Cesarean Scar Pregnancy Registry collects anonymized ultrasound and clinical data of individual patients with a cesarean scar pregnancy on a secure, digital information platform. Cases were uploaded by 31 participating centers across 19 countries. In this study, we only included live and failing cesarean scar pregnancies (with or without a positive fetal heart beat) that received active treatment (medical or surgical) before 12+6 weeks' gestation to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the different management options. Patients managed expectantly were not included in this study and will be reported separately. Treatment was classified as successful if it led to a complete resolution of the pregnancy without the need for any additional medical interventions. Results: Between August 29, 2018, and February 28, 2023, we recorded 460 patients with cesarean scar pregnancies (281 live, 179 failing cesarean scar pregnancy) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were registered. A total of 270 of 460 (58.7%) patients were managed surgically, 123 of 460 (26.7%) patients underwent medical management, 46 of 460 (10%) patients underwent balloon management, and 21 of 460 (4.6%) patients received other, less frequently used treatment options. Suction evacuation was very effective with a success rate of 202 of 221 (91.5%; 95% confidence interval, 87.8-95.2), whereas systemic methotrexate was least effective with only 38 of 64 (59.4%; 95% confidence interval, 48.4-70.4) patients not requiring additional treatment. Overall, surgical treatment of cesarean scar pregnancies was successful in 236 of 258 (91.5%, 95% confidence interval, 88.4-94.5) patients and complications were observed in 24 of 258 patients (9.3%; 95% confidence interval, 6.6-11.9). Conclusion: A cesarean scar pregnancy can be managed effectively in the first trimester of pregnancy in more than 90% of cases with either suction evacuation, balloon treatment, or surgical excision. The effectiveness of all treatment options decreases with advancing gestational age, and cesarean scar pregnancies should be treated as early as possible after confirmation of the diagnosis. Local medical treatment with potassium chloride or methotrexate is less efficient and has higher rates of complications than the other treatment options. Systemic methotrexate has a substantial risk of failing and a higher complication rate and should not be recommended as first-line treatment

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe