Search

Objective: To show noninferiority of a limited-excision (resection of the dysplastic lesion only) vs. classical Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ)., Methods: In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, women with human papillomavirus (HPV) positive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 were randomized into two groups (1:1). Primary outcome was the rate of negative HPV tests after 6 months, secondary outcomes included cone size, complete resection rates as well as cytological and histological results after 6 and 12 months. A sample size of 1,000 was calculated to show noninferiority of the limited-excision compared to the LLETZ group using a noninferiority margin of 5%. Enrollment was stopped after 100 patients due to slow accrual., Results: Patients in the limited-excision group did not show a lower number of negative HPV tests (78% [LLETZ]-80% [limited-excision]=-2%; 90% confidence interval=-15%, 12%). The limited-excision resulted in a substantially lower cone size (LLETZ: 1.97 mL vs. limited-excision: 1.02 mL; p<0.001) but higher numbers of involved margins (LLETZ: 8% vs. limited-excision: 20%). Although postoperative cytological results slightly differed, histological results were similar in both groups. One limited-excision patient received immediate re-conisation, whereas one patient in each group was scheduled for re-conisation after 6 months., Conclusion: The limited-excision could represent a promising option to reduce the surgical extent of conisations while maintaining oncological safety. The trial was not sufficiently powered to reach statistical significance due to early termination. Nevertheless, the study provides important insights in the feasibility of a limited-excision and could serve as a pilot study for future trials., Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register Identifier: DRKS00006169., Competing Interests: The authors declare no financial support of this study. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. Sven Mahner is involved in research support, advisory board, honoraria and travel expenses from AstraZeneca, Colvis, Medac, MSD, PharmaMar, Roche, Sensor Kinesis, Tesaro and Teva., (Copyright © 2019. Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology.)

Objective: To evaluate delayed interval deliveries in multiple gestations in regard of delayed interval and neonatal survival and to provide a protocol., Methods: Data of multiple pregnancies with delayed interval delivery at a tertiary maternity unit between 2002 and 2017 were collected. Contraindications for evaluation of a delay of the delivery of the remaining child were: severe maternal blood loss, poor maternal general condition, preeclampsia, placental abruption, fetal distress, serious congenital malformations of the remaining child, chorioamnionitis, and premature rupture of membranes of the second fetus. A total of 14 cases was included in this retrospective monocentric analysis., Results: The cohort comprised nine twin and five triplet pregnancies. Mean gestational age at delivery of the first fetus was 21 + 6 and 26 + 0 of the retained fetus, respectively. The earliest delivery of the first fetus was at 15 + 2 weeks. The mean interval of the delay was 29.3 days (2-82 days). Mortality of the first fetuses was 53.3%, while it was 17.6% for the retained fetuses. Maternal outcome was good in general: two cases of major blood loss occurred with the necessity of a blood transfusion., Conclusion: Delayed interval delivery is a reasonable approach in cases of an imminent preterm birth in multiple gestations which can be performed with a good fetal outcome and limited maternal risks. The situation when this procedure may be an option always comes unexpected. Therefore, the team of perinatologists should keep it in mind as one potential therapeutic approach. In addition, a standard protocol for the procedure should be established in the perinatal center.