24 research outputs found
The FOAM study : Is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
This is an investigator initiated trial, VU medical center Amsterdam is the sponsor, contact information: prof. CJM de Groot, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel: + 31-204444444. This study is funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 837001504. ZonMW gives financial support for the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provides the ExEm FOAM® kits. The funding bodies have no role in the design of the study; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; and in writing the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial
Funding Information: The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study funded by ZonMw, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). ZonMw funded the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm-foamVR kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Retrospective evaluation of whole exome and genome mutation calls in 746 cancer samples
Funder: NCI U24CA211006Abstract: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) curated consensus somatic mutation calls using whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS), respectively. Here, as part of the ICGC/TCGA Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium, which aggregated whole genome sequencing data from 2,658 cancers across 38 tumour types, we compare WES and WGS side-by-side from 746 TCGA samples, finding that ~80% of mutations overlap in covered exonic regions. We estimate that low variant allele fraction (VAF < 15%) and clonal heterogeneity contribute up to 68% of private WGS mutations and 71% of private WES mutations. We observe that ~30% of private WGS mutations trace to mutations identified by a single variant caller in WES consensus efforts. WGS captures both ~50% more variation in exonic regions and un-observed mutations in loci with variable GC-content. Together, our analysis highlights technological divergences between two reproducible somatic variant detection efforts
Changes in the Uterine Scar during the First Year after a Caesarean Section: A Prospective Longitudinal Study
Aim: To study changes in a ceasarean section (CS) scar during the first year after a CS using gel installation sonography (GIS). Methods: Proof-of-concept study, prospective cohort study. Twenty women who delivered by their first CS were evaluated by both transvaginal sonography and GIS 2 months and 1 year after CS. A niche was defined as an anechogenic space at the uterine caesarean scar with a depth >2 mm. The primary outcome was any change in the thickness of the residual myometrium (RMT) as evaluated by GIS. Results: Mean RMT changed in time from 11.9 mm at 2 months to 6.5 mm at 12 months after the CS (p < 0.001). Niche prevalence did not change. The adjacent myometrium (AM) reduced from 15 to 12.4 mm (p = 0.04). The ratio between RMT and AM with GIS decreased from 0.80 at 2 months to 0.54 at 12 months (p = 0.002). Conclusion: RMT thickness, the adjacent myometium and the ratio between the RMT and AM reduces from 2 to 12 months after a CS. The prevalence did not change. This needs to be taken into account when deciding on the timing of niche measurement and the interpretation of the RMT
Changes in the Uterine Scar during the First Year after a Caesarean Section: A Prospective Longitudinal Study
Prognostic Factors for Niche Development in the Uterine Caesarean Section Scar
In a prospective study on 134 women after their first cesarean section prognostic factors for developing an uterine niche (scar defect) measured with sonohysterography were evaluated. With multivariable logistic regression anlaysis the following prognostic factors were identified; enlarged cervical dilatation and induction of labour. Contractions before labour reduced the risk for niche development. The predictive value of the model made with this prognostic factors was low. The development of a niche is a multifactorial proces and more studies are needed
Niches after cesarean section in a population seeking hysteroscopic sterilization
Objective To study the prevalence of hysteroscopically evaluated disruptions of the integrity of the uterine wall (‘niches’) in women with and without a previous cesarean section. Study design A prospective cohort study was performed in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Women seeking hysteroscopic sterilization were included. A hysteroscopic evaluation of the anterior wall of the uterus and cervix to identify the existence of disruptions (niches) was performed in a standard manner. Primary outcome was the presence of a uterine niche, defined as any visible defect, disruption, or concavity (gap) in the anterior wall. Secondary outcome was to develop a registration form of niche features for hysteroscopic evaluation. Results In total, 713 women were included, 603 without and 110 with a previous cesarean section. In women with a previous cesarean Section 83 (75%) niches were observed using hysteroscopy. Anterior wall disruptions were not observed in women without a cesarean section. The following niche features were identified and incorporated in a registration form: polyps, cysts, myometrium defect, fibrotic tissue, (abnormal) vascular pattern, lateral branches, mucus production inside the defect, and bleeding. Conclusion In a prospective cohort study among women undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization, a uterine niche could be detected by hysteroscopy in 75% of women with a previous cesarean section
Niches after cesarean section in a population seeking hysteroscopic sterilization
Objective To study the prevalence of hysteroscopically evaluated disruptions of the integrity of the uterine wall (‘niches’) in women with and without a previous cesarean section. Study design A prospective cohort study was performed in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Women seeking hysteroscopic sterilization were included. A hysteroscopic evaluation of the anterior wall of the uterus and cervix to identify the existence of disruptions (niches) was performed in a standard manner. Primary outcome was the presence of a uterine niche, defined as any visible defect, disruption, or concavity (gap) in the anterior wall. Secondary outcome was to develop a registration form of niche features for hysteroscopic evaluation. Results In total, 713 women were included, 603 without and 110 with a previous cesarean section. In women with a previous cesarean Section 83 (75%) niches were observed using hysteroscopy. Anterior wall disruptions were not observed in women without a cesarean section. The following niche features were identified and incorporated in a registration form: polyps, cysts, myometrium defect, fibrotic tissue, (abnormal) vascular pattern, lateral branches, mucus production inside the defect, and bleeding. Conclusion In a prospective cohort study among women undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization, a uterine niche could be detected by hysteroscopy in 75% of women with a previous cesarean section
Can Hysterosalpingo-Foam Sonography Replace Hysterosalpingography as First-Choice Tubal Patency Test? A Randomized Non-inferiority Trial
(Abstracted from Hum Reprod 2022;37:969-979) A main cause of female infertility is tubal pathology, with 11% to 30% of cases resulting from previous surgery, infections (such as sexually transmitted diseases), or endometriosis. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is considered as the first choice for a tubal patency test during fertility workup, but the more patient-friendly hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography option has also been introduced
Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial: A randomized non-inferiority trial
STUDY QUESTION: Does hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) lead to similar pregnancy outcomes, compared with hysterosalpingography (HSG), as first-choice tubal patency test in infertile couples? SUMMARY ANSWER: HyFoSy and HSG produce similar findings in a majority of patients and clinical management based on the results of either HyFoSy or HSG, leads to comparable pregnancy outcomes. HyFoSy is experienced as significantly less painful. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Traditionally, tubal patency testing during fertility work-up is performed by HSG. HyFoSy is an alternative imaging technique lacking ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast medium exposure which is less expensive than HSG. Globally, there is a shift towards the use of office-based diagnostic methods, such as HyFoSy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This multicentre, prospective, comparative study with a randomized design was conducted in 26 hospitals in The Netherlands. Participating women underwent both HyFoSy and HSG in randomized order. In case of discordant results, women were randomly allocated to either a management strategy based on HyFoSy or one based on HSG. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included infertile women between 18 and 41 years old who were scheduled for tubal patency testing during their fertility work-up. Women with anovulatory cycles not responding to ovulation induction, endometriosis, severe male infertility or a known iodine contrast allergy were excluded. The primary outcome for the comparison of the HyFoSy- and HSG-based strategies was ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth within 12 months after inclusion in an intention-to-treat analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between May 2015 and January 2019, 1026 women underwent HyFoSy and HSG. HyFoSy was inconclusive in 97 of them (9.5%), HSG was inconclusive in 30 (2.9%) and both were inconclusive in 9 (0.9%). In 747 women (73%) conclusive tests results were concordant. Of the 143/1026 (14%) with discordant results, 105 were randomized to clinical management based on the results of either HyFoSy or HSG. In this group, 22 of the 54 women (41%) allocated to management based on HyFoSy and 25 of 51 women (49%) allocated to management based on HSG had an ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth (Difference -8%; 95% CI: -27% to 10%). In total, clinical management based on the results of HyFoSy was estimated to lead to a live birth in 474 of 1026 women (46%) versus 486 of 1026 (47%) for management based on HSG (Difference -1.2%; 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%). Given the pre-defined margin of -2%, statistically significant non-inferiority of HyFoSy relative to HSG could not be demonstrated (P = 0.27). The mean pain score for HyFoSy on the 1-10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was 3.1 (SD 2.2) and the mean VAS pain score for HSG was 5.4 (SD 2.5; P for difference < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Since all women underwent both tubal patency tests, no conclusions on a direct therapeutic effect of tubal flushing could be drawn. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: HyFoSy or HSG produce similar tubal pathology findings in a majority of infertile couples and, where they differ, a difference in findings does not lead to substantial difference in pregnancy outcome, while HyFoSy is associated with significantly less pain. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study funded by ZonMw, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). ZonMw funded the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm-foam® kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. K.D. reports travel and speaker fees from Guerbet. F.J.M.B. reports personal fees as a member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono, The Netherlands, and a research support grant from Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. C.B.L. reports speakers' fee from Ferring in the past, and his department receives research grants from Ferring, Merck and Guerbet. J.S. reports a research agreement with Takeda on MR of motility outside the submitted work. M.V.W. reports leading The Netherlands Satellite of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.J.M. reports consultancy for Guerbet and research funding from Merck and Guerbet. V.M. reports non-financial support from IQ medicals ventures, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Guerbet, outside the submitted work. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4746/NL4587 (https://www.trialregister.nl). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 19 August 2014. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT: 7 May 2015