Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the value of intrauterine platelet-rich concentrates among patients with intrauterine adhesions (IUAs) after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. METHODS Four different databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ISI web of science) were searched for the available studies from inception to November 2021. We selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared platelet-rich concentrates in the intervention group versus no injection of platelet-rich concentrates in the control group among women with intrauterine adhesions after operative hysteroscopy. Revman software was utilized for performing our meta-analysis. Our primary outcomes were the adhesion score and incidence of recurrence of severe intrauterine adhesions postoperatively. Our secondary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate, menstrual flow duration in days, and menstrual flow amount (number of pads). RESULTS Five RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 329 patients. We found that platelet-rich concentrates were linked to a significant reduction in the postoperative adhesion score (MD = -1.00, 95% CI [-1.68, -0.32], p = 0.004). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in the incidence of severe IUAs recurrence among the platelet-rich concentrates group (7.6%) compared to the control group (23.4%) after hysteroscopy (p = 0.001). The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly increased among the platelet-rich concentrates group (37.1%) in comparison with the control group (20.7%) after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis (p = 0.008). There were significant improvements in the menstrual flow duration and amount among the platelet-rich concentrates group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Intrauterine placement of platelet-rich concentrates is an effective method for the treatment of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopy.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of oxytocics administration (oxytocin and carbetocin) on reducing intraoperative bleeding during abdominal myomectomy. METHODS PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception until March 2021. Only randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) were considered. The included RCTs were evaluated for risk of bias. The main outcome measures were mean intraoperative blood loss (ml), mean duration of hospital stay (day), mean operation time (min), mean difference of postoperative hemoglobin (g/dl), mean difference of postoperative hematocrit (%), and rate of blood transfusion (%). Pooled outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model. RESULTS Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria (n=758 patients; 329 patients per group). Compared with control group, oxytocin and carbetocin resulted in a significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (MD=-281.08 ml, 95% CI [-400.63, -161.53], p<0.001), hospital stay (MD=-0.21 days, 95% CI [-0.31, -0.10], p<0.001), and need for blood transfusion (RR=0.32, 95% CI [0.22, 0.46], p<0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that oxytocin, but not carbetocin, correlated with a reduced mean difference of postoperative hemoglobin (MD=0.60 g/dl, 95% CI [0.24 to 0.96], p=0.001), postoperative hematocrit (MD=2.29%, 95% CI [1.06, 3.52], p<0.001), and operation time (MD=-14.66 min, 95% CI [-21.04, -8.25], p<0.001) compared with control group. CONCLUSION Among women undergoing abdominal myomectomy, administration of oxytocin and carbetocin correlated with several beneficial clinical outcomes, such as reduced intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirement.

Abstract

Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) can lead to substantial blood loss that compromises maternal hemodynamic stability and consequently cause severe maternal complications such as organ dysfunction or death. Intraoperative cell salvage (IOCS), an effective method of blood conservation used in other surgical specialties, can be an alternative intervention for managing PPH. Thus, our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IOCS for women at high risk of PPH undergoing cesarean sections. We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases from inception to February 25, 2021 for randomized controlled studies and observational studies published in English or Mandarin about IOCS use in cesarean sections. Primary outcomes of interest were changes in postoperative hematologic parameters and any adverse events reported among patients that had IOCS and controls that had an allogeneic blood transfusion. The certainty of the evidence of the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A total of 24 studies with 5872 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Eleven randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 13 observational studies were analyzed. Postoperative hemoglobin levels were higher among patients with IOCS SMD 0.39 (95% CI; 0.20, 0.60; P < 0.001, high certainty). Allogeneic blood transfusion increased adverse events RR = 1.81(95% CI; 1.24, 2.62; P = 0.002, low certainty). IOCS shortened hospital stay SMD - 0.59 (95% CI: - 0.98, - 0.19; P = 0.004, low certainty) and shortened prothrombin time SMD - 0.67 (95% CI; - 1.31, - 0.04), P = 0.037, low certainty). The lower incidence of transfusion-related adverse events and shorter hospital stay among other findings demonstrate that IOCS use in obstetrics is an effective and safe alternative for the management of PPH; however, high-quality randomized control studies are required to confirm this evidence.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Despite the fact that endometrial ablation/resection is a very successful treatment for women with heavy menstrual bleeding, re-intervention with additional surgery is needed in 12-25% of the cases. Introducing a levonorgestrel-intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) immediately after ablation could preserve the integrity of the uterine cavity and suppress the regenerated or non-ablated endometrial tissue. Therefore, this combined treatment can perhaps lower the re-intervention rate. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the impact of the combined treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library were systematically searched. No language restrictions were applied. All types of studies were included reporting on the results of endometrial ablation or resection combined with immediate insertion of LNG-IUS for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. The primary outcome was the number of hysterectomies after the ablation procedure. Secondary outcomes included re-intervention rates, removals of LNG-IUS, bleeding pattern, patient satisfaction, side-effects and complications. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO, an international prospective register of systematic reviews under registration number CRD42020151384. RESULTS Six studies with a retrospective design and one case series with a follow up duration varying from 6 to 55 months were included. In total, 427 women were treated with the combined treatment. The studies described a lower hysterectomy and re-intervention rate after combined treatment compared to treatment with endometrial ablation/resection alone. Hysterectomy rate varied from 0-11% after combined treatment versus 9.4-24% after endometrial ablation/resection alone. Bleeding patterns and patient satisfaction appeared to be in favour of the combined treatment group. No intra or post operation complications or complications in the removal of LNG-IUS were described. Most described side effects after combined treatment were weight gain, mood changes and head-aches. An additional eleven studies with only an abstract available substantiated these findings. All the included studies had poor methodologic quality. CONCLUSIONS Based on the available literature inserting an LNG-IUS immediately after endometrial ablation/resection seems to lower the hysterectomy and re-intervention rates compared to ablation/resection alone. However, since only limited observational studies of low methodological quality are available, high quality research is necessary to confirm the findings of this systematic review.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To synthesize available evidence on intravenous (IV) oxytocin dosing regimens for the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) at cesarean section (CS). DATA SOURCES We searched Medline/OVID, Embase, Global Index Medicus, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP for eligible studies published until Feb 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included any randomized or non-randomized study published in peer-reviewed journals that compared at least two different dosing regimens of IV oxytocin for PPH prevention in women undergoing CS. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS Two authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcome was incidence of PPH ≥ 1000 mL. Other review outcomes included use of additional uterotonics, blood loss, and adverse maternal events. Data were analyzed based on type of IV administration (bolus only, infusion only, bolus plus infusion) and oxytocin dose. Meta-analysis was performed using randomized trials and reported using risk ratios or mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. GRADE was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Findings from dose-finding trials and non-randomized studies were reported narratively. RESULTS Thirty-five studies (7,333 women) met our inclusion criteria, including 30 randomized trials and five non-randomized studies. There were limited data from trials for most outcomes, and results were not conclusive. Compared to bolus plus infusion regimens, bolus only regimens probably result in slightly higher mean blood loss (MD 52 mL, 95% CI 0.4-104 mL, moderate certainty). Amongst bolus plus infusion regimens, initial bolus doses < 5 IU may reduce nausea (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.63, low certainty) as compared to 5-9 IU. Total oxytocin doses 5-9 IU versus 10-19 IU may increase use of additional uterotonics (RR 13.00, 95% CI 1.75-96.37, low certainty). Effects on other outcomes were generally inconclusive. CONCLUSION There are limited data comparing IV oxytocin regimens for PPH prevention at CS. Bolus plus infusion regimens may lead to minor reductions in mean blood loss, and initial bolus doses of < 5 IU may minimize nausea. Bolus only regimens of 10 IU versus 5 IU may decrease use of additional uterotonics, however further comparative trials are required to understand effects on other key outcomes, particularly hypotension.

Abstract

PURPOSE Patients undergo dilatation and evacuation for abortion or miscarriage. However, bleeding is sometimes problematic. Despite reports on the association between volatile anesthetics and increased bleeding during the procedure, firm evidence is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of volatile anesthetics and propofol on the amount of bleeding in patients undergoing dilatation and evacuation. METHODS We conducted a systematic search of four databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), from their respective inception to April 2021. Moreover, we searched two trial registration sites. The inclusion criterion was randomized controlled trials of patients who underwent dilatation and evacuation under general anesthesia using volatile anesthetics or propofol. The primary outcome was the amount of perioperative bleeding. The mean difference of the bleeding was combined using a random-effects model. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias with Cochrane domains. We controlled type I and II errors due to sparse data and repetitive testing with Trial Sequential Analysis. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE. RESULTS Five studies were included in the systematic review. The amount of bleeding was compared in four studies and was higher in the volatile anesthetic group, with a mean difference of 164.7 ml (95% confidence interval, 43.6 to 285.7; p = 0.04). Heterogeneity was considerable, with an I2 value of 97%. Two studies evaluated the incidence of significant bleeding, which was significantly higher in the volatile anesthetic group (RR, 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-5.63; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION Choosing propofol over volatile anesthetics during dilatation and evacuation might reduce bleeding and the incidence of excessive bleeding. However, the quality of the evidence was very low. This necessitates further trials with a low risk of bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO (CRD42019120873).

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The current study has been conducted to identify risk factors associated with blood transfusion in women undergoing cesarean section (C-section). A detailed account of risk factors associated with the blood transfusion will ultimately prevent unnecessary crossmatching in the hospital setups, leading to the conservation of declining blood supplies and resources without subjugating the quality of care. MATERIAL AND METHODS We performed a rigorous literature search using electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase, for studies evaluating the risk factors for blood transfusion in the C-section published until March 31, 2021. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was deployed to assess the methodologic quality of the included studies. Mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Review Manager version 5.3. RESULTS The search yielded 1,563 records, 22 of which were eligible for inclusion, representing 426,094 women (10,959 in the transfused group and 415,135 in the non-transfused group). Participants in the transfused group had lower mean preoperative hematocrit (MD= -3.71 [-4.46, -2.96]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 88%). Placenta previa (OR= 9.54 [7.23, 12.59]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 88%), placental abruption (OR= 6.77 [5.25, 8.73]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 72%), emergency C-section (OR= 1.92 [1.42, 2.60]; p< 0.0001; I(2)= 75%), general anesthesia (OR= 8.43 [7.90, 9.00]; p<0.00001; I(2)= 72%), multiple gestations (OR= 1.60 [1.24, 2.06]; p= 0.0003; I(2)= 85%), preterm labor (OR= 3.34 [2.75, 4.06]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 85%), prolonged labor (OR= 1.68 [1.44, 1.96]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 78%), unbooked cases (OR= 2.42 [1.22, 4.80]; p= 0.01; I(2)= 80%), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (OR= 1.81 [1.72, 1.90]; p< 0.00001; I(2)= 71%), and fibroids (OR= 2.32 [1.55, 3.47]; p< 0.0001; I(2)= 72%) were significantly higher in the transfused group compared to the non-transfused group. Chronic hypertension (OR= 0.67 [0.29, 1.55]; p= 0.36; I(2)= 90%),maternal age (MD= 0.09 [-0.27, 0.45]; p= 0.62; I(2)= 50%), maternal body mass index (MD= -0.14 [-0.81, 0.53]; p= 0.67, I(2)= 86%), diabetes (OR= 0.93 [0.75, 1.15]; p= 0.51; I(2)= 52%), and malpresentation (OR= 0.65 [0.38, 1.11]; p= 0.13; I(2)= 64%) were not significantly associated with an increased risk of blood transfusion in C-section in the two groups. CONCLUSION Placenta previa, placental abruption, emergency C-section, booking status, multiple gestations, and preoperative hematocrit were the risk factors most significantly associated with blood transfusion, while a prior C-section did not increase the risk of transfusion.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Minimizing intraoperative blood loss during hysterectomy is crucial to lessen associated perioperative morbidity. The aim of this investigation is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared vasopressin versus normal saline in controlling intraoperative blood loss during hysterectomy. DATA SOURCES We screened five major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from inception till July 18, 2021. We used the following query search in all databases: (vasopressin OR arginine vasopressin OR argipressin OR antidiuretic hormone) AND (hysterectomy) AND (saline OR placebo OR control OR no treatment) AND (randomized OR randomised OR randomly). There was no language restriction during database screening. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION We considered all studies that met the following evidence-based criteria: (i) Patients: individuals undergoing hysterectomy for any indication, (ii) Intervention: vasopressin, (iii) Comparator: normal saline, placebo, or no treatment, (iv) Outcomes: reliable extraction of any of our endpoints, and (v) Study design: RCTs. We assessed risk of bias of included studies and pooled endpoints as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed statistical analysis using the Review Manager software, version 5.4.0. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS Seven RCTs with an overall low risk of bias met the inclusion criteria. This meta-analysis included a total of 455 patients; 232 and 223 patients were allocated to vasopressin and control group, respectively. The majority of RCTs were vaginal hysterectomy (n=5) with few abdominal hysterectomy (n=2) and no laparoscopic hysterectomy. The mean estimated intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in favor of the vasopressin group compared with the control group (n=6 RCTs, MD=-119.85 ml, 95% CI [-177.55, -62.14], p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding mean operating time, mean change in postoperative hemoglobin, mean hospital stay, rate of febrile morbidity, rate of pelvic infection, rate of perioperative blood transfusion, and rate of perioperative complications. CONCLUSION Compared with normal saline, vasopressin significantly reduced the estimated blood loss during hysterectomy, but did not change any clinically significant outcomes. Additionally, vasopressin was safe and did not correlate with an increase in the rates of febrile morbidity or pelvic infection.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Bleeding is the leading cause of maternal mortality in the world. Tranexamic acid reduces bleeding in trauma and surgery. Several systematic reviews of randomized trials have investigated tranexamic acid in the prevention of bleeding in caesarean delivery. However, the conclusions from systematic reviews are conflicting. This overview aims to summarize the evidence and explore the reasons for conflicting conclusions across the systematic reviews. METHODS A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted from inception to April 2021. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed by two independent reviewers. A Measurement Tool to Assess Reviews 2 and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews were used for study appraisal. A qualitative synthesis of evidence is presented. RESULTS Fourteen systematic reviews were included in our analysis. Across these reviews, there were 32 relevant randomized trials. A modest reduction in blood transfusions and bleeding outcomes was found by most systematic reviews. Overall confidence in results varied from low to critically low. All of the included systematic reviews were at high risk of bias. Quality of evidence from randomized trials was uncertain. CONCLUSIONS Systematic reviews investigating prophylactic tranexamic acid in caesarean delivery are heterogeneous in terms of methodological and reporting quality. Tranexamic acid may reduce blood transfusion and bleeding outcomes, but rigorous well-designed research is needed due to the limitations of the included studies. Data on safety and adverse effects is insufficient to draw conclusions.

Abstract

BACKGROUND There is no consensus on the best timing for prophylactic oxytocin administration during cesarean section (CS) to prevent post-partum hemorrhage (PPH). OBJECTIVES Assess the effects of administrating prophylactic oxytocin at different times during CS. METHODS We searched nine databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCT). We pooled results and calculated average risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the overall evidence certainty. RESULTS We screened 13,389 references and included four trials. We found no statistically significant differences between oxytocin given before versus after fetal delivery on PPH (RR 0.60, 95%CI 0.15-2.47; 1 RCT, N = 300) or nausea/vomiting (RR 1.21, 95%CI 0.69-2.13; 1 RCT, N = 300). There was a significant reduction in the need for additional uterotonics when oxytocin was given immediately before uterine incision versus after fetal delivery (RR 0.37, 95%CI 0.18-0.73; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs; N = 301). Oxytocin given before fetal delivery significantly reduced intra-operative blood loss (MD -146.77mL, 95%CI -168.10 to -125.43; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, N = 601) but did not change the incidence of blood transfusion (RR 0.50, 95%CI 0.13-1.95; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, N = 301) or hysterectomy (RR 3.00; 95%CI 0.12-72.77; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, N = 301). One trial (N = 100) compared prophylactic oxytocin before versus after placental separation and found no significant differences on PPH, additional uterotonics, or nausea/vomiting. CONCLUSIONS In women having pre-labor CS, there is limited evidence indicating no significant differences between prophylactic oxytocin given before versus after fetal delivery on PPH, nausea/vomiting, blood transfusion, or hysterectomy. Earlier oxytocin administration may reduce the volume of blood loss and need for additional uterotonics. There is very limited evidence suggesting no significant differences between prophylactic oxytocin given before versus after placental separation on PPH, need for additional uterotonic, or nausea/vomiting. The overall certainty of the evidence was mostly low or very low due to imprecision. Protocol: CRD42020186797.