MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. In all, 212 women with a low-risk pregnancy or with gestational diabetes were recruited including 158 nulliparous and 54 parous women. Maternal demographic, clinical and ultrasound characteristics were collected at 37 weeks of gestation. Semi-Bayesian logistic regression and Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation were used to assess the relation between cervical length and cesarean section in labor.
RESULTS: Rates of cesarean section were 5% (2/55) for cervical length ≤20 mm, 17% (17/101) for cervical length 20-32 mm, and 27% (13/56) for cervical length >32 mm. These rates were 4, 22 and 33%, respectively, in nulliparous women. In the semi-Bayesian analysis, the odds ratio for cesarean section was 6.2 (95% confidence interval 2.2-43) for cervical length 20-32 mm and 10 (95% confidence interval 4.8-74) for cervical length >32 mm compared with the lowest quartile of cervical length, after adjusting for maternal age, parity, height, prepregnancy body mass index, gestational diabetes, induction of labor, neonatal sex and birthweight centile.
CONCLUSIONS: Cervical length at 37 weeks of gestation is associated with intrapartum cesarean section.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: Genetic instruments to proxy 12 risk factors were constructed by identifying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that were robustly (P < 5 × 10-8) and independently associated with each respective risk factor in previously reported genome-wide association studies. These risk factors included genetic liability to 3 factors (endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome, type 2 diabetes) scaled to reflect a 50% higher odds liability to disease. We obtained summary statistics for the association of these SNPs with risk of overall and histotype-specific invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (22,406 cases; 40,941 controls) and low malignant potential tumours (3,103 cases; 40,941 controls) from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC). The OCAC dataset comprises 63 genotyping project/case-control sets with participants of European ancestry recruited from 14 countries (US, Australia, Belarus, Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Canada, Poland, UK, Spain, Netherlands, and Sweden). SNPs were combined into multi-allelic inverse-variance-weighted fixed or random effects models to generate effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Three complementary sensitivity analyses were performed to examine violations of MR assumptions: MR-Egger regression and weighted median and mode estimators. A Bonferroni-corrected P value threshold was used to establish strong evidence (P < 0.0042) and suggestive evidence (0.0042 < P < 0.05) for associations. In MR analyses, there was strong or suggestive evidence that 2 of the 12 risk factors were associated with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer and 8 of the 12 were associated with 1 or more invasive epithelial ovarian cancer histotypes. There was strong evidence that genetic liability to endometriosis was associated with an increased risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (odds ratio [OR] per 50% higher odds liability: 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15; P = 6.94 × 10-7) and suggestive evidence that lifetime smoking exposure was associated with an increased risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (OR per unit increase in smoking score: 1.36, 95% CI 1.04-1.78; P = 0.02). In analyses examining histotypes and low malignant potential tumours, the strongest associations found were between height and clear cell carcinoma (OR per SD increase: 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.61; P = 0.0003); age at natural menopause and endometrioid carcinoma (OR per year later onset: 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16; P = 0.007); and genetic liability to polycystic ovary syndrome and endometrioid carcinoma (OR per 50% higher odds liability: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96; P = 0.002). There was little evidence for an association of genetic liability to type 2 diabetes, parity, or circulating levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and sex hormone binding globulin with ovarian cancer or its subtypes. The primary limitations of this analysis include the modest statistical power for analyses of risk factors in relation to some less common ovarian cancer histotypes (low grade serous, mucinous, and clear cell carcinomas), the inability to directly examine the association of some ovarian cancer risk factors that did not have robust genetic variants available to serve as proxies (e.g., oral contraceptive use, hormone replacement therapy), and the assumption of linear relationships between risk factors and ovarian cancer risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive examination of possible aetiological drivers of ovarian carcinogenesis using germline genetic variants to proxy risk factors supports a role for few of these factors in invasive epithelial ovarian cancer overall and suggests distinct aetiologies across histotypes. The identification of novel risk factors remains an important priority for the prevention of epithelial ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate regular (4-hourly prior to each oral misoprostol dose with amniotomy when feasible) compared with restricted (only if indicated) vaginal assessments during labor induction with oral misoprostol in term nulliparous women MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a randomized trial between November 2016 and September 2017 in a university hospital in Malaysia. Our oral misoprostol labor induction regimen comprised 50 μg of misoprostol administered 4 hourly for up to 3 doses in the first 24 hours. Participants assigned to regular assessment had vaginal examinations before each 4-hourly misoprostol dose with a view to amniotomy as soon as it was feasible. Participants in the restricted arm had vaginal examinations only if indicated. Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with the birth process (using an 11-point visual numerical rating scale), induction to vaginal delivery interval, and vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours.
RESULTS: Data from 204 participants (101 regular, 103 restricted) were analyzed. The patient satisfaction score with the birth process was as follows (median [interquartile range]): 7 [6-9] vs 8 [6-10], P = .15. The interval of induction to vaginal delivery (mean ± standard deviation) was 24.3 ± 12.8 vs 31.1 ± 15.0 hours (P = .013). The vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours was 27.7% vs 20.4%; (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-2.3; P = .14) for the regular vs restricted arms, respectively. The cesarean delivery rate was 50% vs 43% (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5; P = .36). When assessed after delivery, participants' fidelity to their assigned vaginal examination schedule in a future labor induction was 45% vs 88% (RR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7; P < .001), and they would recommend their assigned schedule to a friend (47% vs 87%; RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7; P < .001) in the regular compared with the restricted arms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Despite a shorter induction to vaginal delivery interval with regular vaginal examination and a similar vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours and birth process satisfaction score, women expressed a higher preference for the restricted examination schedule and were more likely to recommend such a schedule to a friend.
METHODOLOGY: A retrospective study on IOL using the CRB in women with previous caesarean section or grandmultiparity between January 2014 and March 2015. All cases were identified from the Sarawak General Hospital CRB request registry. Individual admission notes were traced and data extracted using a standardised proforma.
RESULTS: The overall success rate of vaginal delivery after IOL was 50%, although this increases to about two-thirds when sub analysis was performed in women with previous tested scars and the unscarred, grandmultiparous woman. There was a significant change in Bishop score prior to insertion and after removal of the CRB. The Bishop score increased by a score of 3.2 (95% CI 2.8-3.6), which was statistically significant (p<0.01) and occurred across both subgroups, not limited to the grandmultipara. There were no cases of hyperstimulation but one case of intrapartum fever and scar dehiscence each (1.4%). Notably, there were two cases of change in lie/presentation after CRB insertion.
CONCLUSION: CRB adds to the obstetricians' armamentarium and appears to provide a reasonable alternative for the IOL in women at high risk of uterine rupture. Rates of hyperstimulation, maternal infection and scar dehiscence are low and hence appeals to the user.