Hysteroscopy for treating subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities

Background : Observational studies suggest higher pregnancy rates after the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions, which are present in 10% to 15% of women seeking treatment for subfertility. Objectives : To assess the effects of the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions suspected on ultrasound, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or prior to intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Search methods : We searched the following databases from their inception to 16 April 2018; The Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online,; MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and other electronic sources of trials including trial registers, sources of unpublished literature, and reference lists. We handsearched the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference abstracts and proceedings (from 1 January 2014 to 12 May 2018) and we contacted experts in the field. Selection criteria : Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for unexplained subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities. Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities prior to medically assisted reproduction. Primary outcomes were live birth and hysteroscopy complications. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy and miscarriage. Data collection and analysis : Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Main results : Two studies met the inclusion criteria. 1. Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for unexplained subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities. In women with otherwise unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids, we were uncertain whether hysteroscopic myomectomy improved the clinical pregnancy rate compared to expectant management (odds ratio (OR) 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 6.17; P = 0.06, 94 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether hysteroscopic myomectomy improves the miscarriage rate compared to expectant management (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.00; P = 0.47, 94 women; very low-quality evidence). We found no data on live birth or hysteroscopy complication rates. We found no studies in women with endometrial polyps, intrauterine adhesions or uterine septum for this randomised comparison. 2. Randomised comparison between operative hysteroscopy versus control for suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities prior to medically assisted reproduction. The hysteroscopic removal of polyps prior to IUI may have improved the clinical pregnancy rate compared to diagnostic hysteroscopy only: if 28% of women achieved a clinical pregnancy without polyp removal, the evidence suggested that 63% of women (95% CI 45% to 89%) achieved a clinical pregnancy after the hysteroscopic removal of the endometrial polyps (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.45 to 7.96; P < 0.00001, 204 women; low-quality evidence). We found no data on live birth, hysteroscopy complication or miscarriage rates in women with endometrial polyps prior to IUI. We found no studies in women with submucous fibroids, intrauterine adhesions or uterine septum prior to IUI or in women with all types of suspected uterine cavity abnormalities prior to IVF/ICSI. Authors' conclusions : Uncertainty remains concerning an important benefit with the hysteroscopic removal of submucous fibroids for improving the clinical pregnancy rates in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility. The available low-quality evidence suggests that the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps suspected on ultrasound in women prior to IUI may improve the clinical pregnancy rate compared to simple diagnostic hysteroscopy. More research is needed to measure the effectiveness of the hysteroscopic treatment of suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities in women with unexplained subfertility or prior to IUI, IVF or ICSI

Has increased clinical experience with methotrexate reduced the direct costs of medical management of ectopic pregnancy compared to surgery?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a debate about the cost-efficiency of methotrexate for the management of ectopic pregnancy (EP), especially for patients presenting with serum human chorionic gonadotrophin levels of >1500 IU/L. We hypothesised that further experience with methotrexate, and increased use of guideline-based protocols, has reduced the direct costs of management with methotrexate.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective cost analysis on women treated for EP in a large UK teaching hospital to (1) investigate whether the cost of medical management is less expensive than surgical management for those patients eligible for both treatments and (2) to compare the cost of medical management for women with hCG concentrations 1500–3000 IU/L against those with similar hCG concentrations that elected for surgery. Three distinct treatment groups were identified: (1) those who had initial medical management with methotrexate, (2) those who were eligible for initial medical management but chose surgery (‘elected’ surgery) and (3) those who initially ‘required’ surgery and did not meet the eligibility criteria for methotrexate. We calculated the costs from the point of view of the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. We summarised the cost per study group using the mean, standard deviation, median and range and, to account for the skewed nature of the data, we calculated 95% confidence intervals for differential costs using the nonparametric bootstrap method.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Methotrexate was £1179 (CI 819–1550) per patient cheaper than surgery but there were no significant savings with methotrexate in women with hCG >1500 IU/L due to treatment failures.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our data support an ongoing unmet economic need for better medical treatments for EP with hCG >1500 IU/L.</p

Uterine artery embolization versus surgical treatment in patients with symptomatic uterine fibroids: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data.

OBJECTIVE: Uterine fibroids are the most common benign tumours in women of the reproductive age. Symptoms of heavy menstrual bleeding, abdominal discomfort and infertility may seriously affect a woman's quality of life. Uterine artery embolization is a safe and effective alternative treatment to hysterectomy or myomectomy for symptomatic uterine fibroids. Which treatment provides the highest quality of life, least complications, symptom reduction and least chance intervention, has not been established and might depend on strict patient selection. This study aims to identify which specific subgroups benefit most of each treatment by analyzing individual participant data derived from randomized controlled trials of women undergoing embolization or surgical treatment. This study will primarily assess the effectiveness of both treatment groups by evaluating the effect on quality of life of embolization in comparison to surgery on specific patient and fibroid characteristics and the possible need for re-intervention for fibroid-related symptoms. DATA SOURCES: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched up to August 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We will collect individual participant data from randomized controlled trials that studied clinical and procedural outcomes of premenopausal women with symptomatic uterine fibroids, who were randomized between uterine artery embolization and surgery. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Individual participant data from all eligible trials will be sought and analysed according to intention-to-treat principle. Risk of Bias will be done by using version 2 of the Cochrane tool for Risk of Bias in randomized trials. Subgroup analyses to explore the effect of e.g. age, fibroid characteristics and fibroid complaints will be performed, if data is available. This individual patient data meta-analysis will be analysed according to a one-stage model

Prospective risk of stillbirth and neonatal complications in twin pregnancies: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risks of stillbirth and neonatal complications by gestational age in uncomplicated monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancies. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases (until December 2015). REVIEW METHODS: Databases were searched without language restrictions for studies of women with uncomplicated twin pregnancies that reported rates of stillbirth and neonatal outcomes at various gestational ages. Pregnancies with unclear chorionicity, monoamnionicity, and twin to twin transfusion syndrome were excluded. Meta-analyses of observational studies and cohorts nested within randomised studies were undertaken. Prospective risk of stillbirth was computed for each study at a given week of gestation and compared with the risk of neonatal death among deliveries in the same week. Gestational age specific differences in risk were estimated for stillbirths and neonatal deaths in monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancies after 34 weeks' gestation. RESULTS: 32 studies (29 685 dichorionic, 5486 monochorionic pregnancies) were included. In dichorionic twin pregnancies beyond 34 weeks (15 studies, 17 830 pregnancies), the prospective weekly risk of stillbirths from expectant management and the risk of neonatal death from delivery were balanced at 37 weeks' gestation (risk difference 1.2/1000, 95% confidence interval -1.3 to 3.6; I(2)=0%). Delay in delivery by a week (to 38 weeks) led to an additional 8.8 perinatal deaths per 1000 pregnancies (95% confidence interval 3.6 to 14.0/1000; I(2)=0%) compared with the previous week. In monochorionic pregnancies beyond 34 weeks (13 studies, 2149 pregnancies), there was a trend towards an increase in stillbirths compared with neonatal deaths after 36 weeks, with an additional 2.5 per 1000 perinatal deaths, which was not significant (-12.4 to 17.4/1000; I(2)=0%). The rates of neonatal morbidity showed a consistent reduction with increasing gestational age in monochorionic and dichorionic pregnancies, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit was the commonest neonatal complication. The actual risk of stillbirth near term might be higher than reported estimates because of the policy of planned delivery in twin pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: To minimise perinatal deaths, in uncomplicated dichorionic twin pregnancies delivery should be considered at 37 weeks' gestation; in monochorionic pregnancies delivery should be considered at 36 weeks. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014007538

Одноколейные тракторно-ледяные дороги: учебное пособие для лесотехнических вузов

Книга содержит описание конструкций однополозных тракторных саней, расчет основных деталей саней, краткие технические условия проектирования одноколейных тракторно-ледяных дорог, правила постройки и эксплуатации ледяных дорог и основы организации тракторного хозяйства на базе одноколейных ледяных дорог. Книга предназначена в качестве учебного пособия для лесотехнических вузов, но может также служить практическим пособием и для высшего технического персонала лесозаготовительных предприятий Наркомлеса СССР.0|7|Предисловие [c. 7]0|8|Введение [c. 8]0|11|Возникновение и развитие конструкции однополозных саней [c. 11]1|11|Первые опыты [c. 11]1|12|Принцип работы одноколейной ледяной дороги и теоретические основания проектирования однополозных саней [c. 12]1|17|Конструкция первых однополозных саней [c. 17]1|17|Однополозные сани Востокостальлеса [c. 17]1|19|Одкополозные сани ЦНИИМЭ, модель Б [c. 19]1|21|Однополозные сани на базе поковок тракторных двухполозных саней модели Д [c. 21]1|22|Однополозные сани Я. И. Гинзбурга модели 1939 г. [c. 22]1|33|Однополозные сани ГЗЯ-2 [c. 33]1|39|Варианты соединения коника с полозом [c. 39]1|39|Модернизированные однополозные сани на базе поковок саней модели Свердлеса и Востокостальлеса [c. 39]1|44|Бескониковые однополозные сани конструкции СибНИИЛХЭ [c. 44]1|46|Буферно-прицепные устройства трактора конструкции УЛТИ, Сотринского мехлесопункта и Стройлеспроекта [c. 46]1|48|Автоматическая сцепка тракторных саней [c. 48]1|49|Рама для перевозки коротья на однополозных санях [c. 49]1|51|Расчет саней [c. 51]1|51|Расчет полоза [c. 51]1|58|О форме подрезов [c. 58]0|61|Постройка одноколейных ледяных дорог [c. 61]1|61|Условия применения, сырьевая база и порядок оформления строительства [c. 61]1|62|Технические условия проектирования одноколейных ледяных дорог [c. 62]1|72|Изыскания трасс одноколейных ледяных дорог [c. 72]1|73|Строительные работы на одноколейных ледяных дорогах [c. 73]1|85|Дорожные орудия для строительства одноколейных ледяных дорог [c. 85]1|91|Цистерны для поливки ледяной дороги [c. 91]1|91|Насосные станции [c. 91]0|95|Эксплуатация ледяных дорог [c. 95]1|95|Техническая характеристика тяговых машин [c. 95]1|107|Эксплуатация газогенераторных тракторов на лесовывозке по ледяным дорогам [c. 107]1|115|Правила вождения поездов [c. 115]1|117|Формирование состава и маневры [c. 117]1|117|Содержание и ремонт пути ледяной дороги [c. 117]1|119|Техника безопасности при вывозке леса по тракторным ледяным дорогам [c. 119]1|121|Основные правила по технике безопасности для тракторного лесотранспорта [c. 121]0|123|Приложения [c. 123]1|123|Детали однополозных саней ГЗЯ-1 [c. 123]1|136|Детали модернизированных однополозных саней на базе поковок саней Свердллеса [c. 136]1|141|Краткая техническая характеристика гусеничных тракторов Челябинского тракторного завода [c. 141]0|143|Оглавление [c. 143

Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study

STUDY QUESTION Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? SUMMARY ANSWER A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of data, or manuscript preparation. B.W.J.M. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). S.B. was supported by University of Auckland Foundation Seelye Travelling Fellowship. S.B. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.J.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form

Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study

Study Question Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future infertility research be developed? Summary Answer A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. What is Known Already Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. Study Design, Size, Duration A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. Main Results and the Role of Chance The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. Limitations, Reasons for Caution We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition, and an arbitrary consensus threshold. Wider Implications of the Findings Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Ferility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set