3 research outputs found

    [A parasitic myoma: unexpected finding after laparoscopic hysterectomy]

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextCASE DESCRIPTION: A 48-year-old woman with a history of hysterectomy presented with a swelling in her lower abdomen. Ultrasound investigation showed a solid tumour with a benign appearance. Differential diagnosis included an ovarian tumour or leiomyoma. Laparoscopic investigation revealed a preperitoneal tumour which was removed by laparotomy. Histologic examination showed a benign leiomyoma. CONCLUSION: A patient with a history of hysterectomy is less likely to present with a myoma, however, in this case the diagnosis was correct. Due to the increasing use of a morcellator in laparoscopic hysterectomy in recent decades, we will be confronted with the diagnosis 'parasitic myoma' more frequently. Patients will have to be informed of the risk of this complication

    Why do couples drop-out from IVF treatment? A prospective cohort study

    No full text
    Background: Cumulative IVF pregnancy rates are compromised by the large number of couples who drop-out of treatment before achieving pregnancy. The aim of this study was to identify the role of the treatment strategy applied, and potential other factors that influence the decision of couples to discontinue treatment. Methods: The incidence of drop-out from IVF treatment and factors related to drop-out were studied in a cohort of IVF patients aged &lt;38 years embarking on IVF treatment either with a mild or a standard treatment strategy for a planned maximum number of treatment cycles. Results: Of the 384 couples studied, 17% dropped out of IVF treatment. The physical or psychological burden of treatment was the most frequent cause of drop-out (28%). The application of a mild treatment strategy (mild ovarian stimulation along with the transfer of a single embryo) significantly reduced the chance of drop-out (hazard ratio (HR) 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.96). When a mild IVF strategy was employed, the association between the baseline anxiety score and drop-out was reduced by &gt;50%. The presence of severe male subfertility (HR 4.80; 95% CI, 1.63-14.13) and the failure to achieve embryo transfer (odds ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.24-0.72) were also related to drop-out. Conclusions: Reducing drop-out rate is crucial to further improve the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of IVF treatment. An important factor determining the risk of drop-out is the burden of the treatment strategy. The application of a mild treatment strategy and managing patient's expectations might reduce drop-out rates.<br/

    Follicle stimulating hormone versus clomiphene citrate in intrauterine insemination for unexplained subfertility: a randomized controlled trial

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextSTUDY QUESTION: Is FSH or clomiphene citrate (CC) the most effective stimulation regimen in terms of ongoing pregnancies in couples with unexplained subfertility undergoing IUI with adherence to strict cancellation criteria as a measure to reduce the number of multiple pregnancies? SUMMARY ANSWER: In IUI with adherence to strict cancellation criteria, ovarian stimulation with FSH is not superior to CC in terms of the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate, and yields a similar, low multiple pregnancy rate. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: FSH has been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates compared to CC, but at the cost of high multiple pregnancy rates. To reduce the risk of multiple pregnancy, new ovarian stimulation regimens have been suggested, these include strict cancellation criteria to limit the number of dominant follicles per cycle i.e. withholding insemination when more than three dominant follicles develop. With such a strategy, it is unclear whether the ovarian stimulation should be done with FSH or with CC. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an open-label multicenter randomized superiority controlled trial in the Netherlands (NTR 4057). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We randomized couples diagnosed with unexplained subfertility and scheduled for a maximum of four cycles of IUI with ovarian stimulation with 75 IU FSH or 100 mg CC. Cycles were cancelled when more then three dominant follicles developed. The primary outcome was cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate. Multiple pregnancy was a secondary outcome. We analysed the data on intention to treat basis. We calculated relative risks and absolute risk difference with 95% CI. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between July 2013 and March 2016, we allocated 369 women to ovarian stimulation with FSH and 369 women to ovarian stimulation with CC. A total of 113 women (31%) had an ongoing pregnancy following ovarian stimulation with FSH and 97 women (26%) had an ongoing pregnancy following ovarian stimulation with CC (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.93-1.47, ARD = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.11). Five women (1.4%) had a multiple pregnancy following ovarian stimulation with FSH and eight women (2.2%) had a multiple pregnancy following ovarian stimulation with CC (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.21-1.89, ARD = -0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.01). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We were not able to blind this study due to the nature of the interventions. We consider it unlikely that this has introduced performance bias, since pregnancy outcomes are objective outcome measures. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We revealed that adherence to strict cancellation criteria is a successful solution to reduce the number of multiple pregnancies in IUI. To decide whether ovarian stimulation with FSH or with CC should be the regimen of choice, costs and patients' preferences should be taken into account. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This trial received funding from the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw). Prof. Dr B.W.J. Mol is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). B.W.M. reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Nederlands Trial Register NTR4057. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 1 July 2013. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: The first patient was randomized at 27 August 2013
    corecore