Search

This narrative review describes the state of the art in the management of anastomotic leakage in ovarian cancer. Multiple surgical procedures, including bowel resection, are often required to achieve “optimal” cytoreduction in locally advanced ovarian cancer. Intestinal anastomosis is currently the most common way to restore bowel continuity. However, in some patients, a temporary protective stoma is indicated to prevent anastomotic leakage. This is an important issue to improve surgical outcomes and until recently there has been a lack of objective data to clarify the risk factors for anastomotic leakage. This review describes the risk factors for AL associated with surgery and compares the results of recent studies. We also review the current indications for placement of a protective ileostomy and treatment options for conservative management of AL. We present two examples of practical clinical AL risk calculators, in addition to the most assessed AL risk factor. To date, the decision-making processes that lead surgeons to perform a protective ileostomy are quite heterogeneous and based on the personal experience of the surgeon, mainly depending on individual training. Three different management options after colorectal anastomosis in OC are described: conservative management, diversion ileostomy and ghost ileostomy.

Background: Intrauterine fetal death and perinatal death represent one of the most relevant medical scientific problems since, in many cases, even after extensive investigation, the causes remain unknown. The considerable increase in medical legal litigation in the obstetrical field that has witnessed in recent years, especially in cases of stillborn births, has simultaneously involved the figure of the forensic pathologist in scientific research aimed at clarifying the pathophysiological processes underlying stillbirth. Methods: our study aims to analyze cases of sudden intrauterine unexplained death syndrome (SIUD) to evaluate the role of oxidative stress in the complex pathogenetic process of stillbirth. In particular, the immunohistochemical expression of specific oxidative stress markers (NOX2, NT, iNOS, 8-HODG, IL-6) was evaluated in tissue samples of placentas of SIUDs belonging to the extensive case series (20 cases), collected from autopsy cases of the University of Ferrara and Politecnica delle Marche between 2017 and 2023. Results: The study demonstrated the involvement of oxidative stress in intrauterine fetal deaths in the placenta of the cases examined. In SIUD, the most expressed oxidative stress markers were NOX2 and 8-HODG. Conclusions: The study contributes to investigating the role of oxidative stress in modulating different pathways in unexplained intrauterine fetal death (SIUD) tissues.

Epidermolysis Bullosa (EB) is an extremely rare and disabling inherited genetic skin disease with a predisposition to develop bullous lesions on the skin and inner mucous membranes, occurring after mild friction or trauma, or even spontaneously. Within the spectrum of EB forms, dystrophic EB (DEB) represents the most intriguing and challenging in terms of clinical management, especially with regard to pregnancy, due to the highly disabling and life-threatening phenotype. Disappointingly, in the literature little focus has been directed towards pregnancy and childbirth in DEB patients, resulting in a lack of sound evidence and guidance for patients themselves and clinicians. The current study aims to contribute to the DEB literature with an updated summary of the existing evidence regarding the obstetrical and anesthesiological management of this rare disease. Furthermore, this literature review sought to answer the question of whether, and if so, in which way, the pregnancy condition may alter the course of the underlying dermatologic skin disease. Having all this information is indispensable when counseling a patient with DEB who desires a child or is expecting one. Finally, we reported own experience with a pregnant woman with a recessive DEB whom we recently managed, with a favorable outcome.

Soft markers are sonographic structural, nonspecific signs with little pathological significance, often transient, usually considered as normal variants. However, they may also be associated with chromosomal abnormalities. The most widely examined soft markers include absent or hypoplastic nasal bone (NB), intracardiac echogenic focus (IEF), ventriculomegaly (VM), thickened nuchal fold (NF), choroid plexus cyst (CPC), echogenic bowel, short long bones, and urinary tract dilation (UTD). Although the use of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been spreading quickly in maternal–fetal medicine, it is not a diagnostic test and it still remains unavailable or cost-prohibitive for most of the population in many countries. After normal screening test results in the first trimester, there is no uniform consensus regarding the clinical significance of isolated soft markers for aneuploidy. Nowadays, the search for soft markers in an ultrasound is still part of clinical evaluation, and the interpretation of these findings is often a matter of debate. In the present review, we summarize the recent literature about the role of soft markers in the era of NIPT and propose an overview of the different clinical guidelines.

This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for pain relief in women during contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the assessment of tubal patency and uterine disease, compared with placebo or no intervention. In December 2021, we searched the electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Sciencedirect, the Cochrane library and Clinicaltrials.gov) without date restriction: We identified 10 randomized control trials (RCTs) (2098 women) eligible for this systematic review, after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among these, five studies compared the use of painkillers with the placebo, two studies compared different catheter positions in the cervix or in the uterine cavity, and two others considered different temperatures of the contrast medium, as a method to reduce pain. Topical lidocaine applied before the procedure may be associated with effective pain relief during hysterosonography, though the quality of this evidence is low. New echogenic contrast agents and their temperature at 37 °C ensure a less painful procedure. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the efficacy of other analgesics or strategies.

Background: There is insufficient high-quality evidence to either support or discourage water birth (WB)., Objectives: To examine different maternal complications of WB compared to standard land birth (LB). The primary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and genital trauma. The secondary outcome included the risk of retained placenta and shoulder dystocia., Methods: We searched the electronic databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO. In addition, we searched in Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov. The pooled results were used to evaluate the association between WB and obstetric outcomes. This systematic review (SR) was reported according to PRISMA statement 2020. Statistical meta-analyses were performed using Cochrane RevMan version 5.4 software (http://www.cochrane.org)., Results: This systematic review included 22 studies (20 observational studies and 2 RCT). The pooled results showed lower risk of major PPH compared to the LB group (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66-0.89), no significant difference (OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.50-1.78) in the incidence of minor PPH (500-1000 mL blood loss) between WB and LB, no significant difference in the rate of third- and fourth-degree lacerations (OR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.71-1.07) and in the incidence of retained placenta (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 0.50-3,35), fewer shoulder dystocia for WB (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.35-0.50). However, compared with the LB group, the rate of first-second-degree tears in the WB group increased by 45% (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.16-1.81)., Conclusion: We support ACOG guidelines recommendation for further RCT to assess the impact of water immersion during delivery on maternal outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)