Comparison of Two Different Sedation Protocols during Transvaginal Oocyte Retrieval: Effects on Propofol Consumption and IVF Outcome: A Prospective Cohort Study.

(1) Background: There has been various reports on the potential impact of anesthetic agents used during oocyte retrieval (OR) on the impairment of the capacity of the oocyte for fertilization and subsequent embryo quality; results have been conflicting; (2) Methods: The effects of two different sedation protocols during OR in two groups of patients undergoing In Vitro Fertilization/Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection IVF/ICSI, were compared on propofol consumption and on in vitro fertilization (IVF)/ICSI success. The study group received dexmedetomidine and fentanyl, while the control remifentanil and midazolam. In a prospective cohort study, we encompassed 72 cycles/patients. The administered dose of propofol per patient and fertilization rates were the primary outcomes, while anesthesiological parameters and IVF/ICSI outcomes were the secondary endpoints; (3) Results: We found a significant increase in propofol consumption in the study compared to the control group (77.0 ± 10.6 mg vs. 12.1 ± 6.1; p < 0.001), but fertilization rates were similar (p = 0.469). From the secondary anesthesiological outcomes, the post anesthesia discharge scores were better in the control group (15.0 (13.5 min) vs. 5.0 (10.0 min), p = 0.028). From the IVF/ICSI secondary outcome parameters, we found a higher quality of embryos on day three in the study compared to the control group (p = 0.040). The comparison of the other secondary outcomes yielded non-significant differences; (4) Conclusions: The use of dexmedetomidine, as an alternative agent during OR, was associated with higher propofol consumption as a rescue dose compared to remifentanil but was linked with similar fertilization rates and higher quality of embryos produced.

Cardiovascular disease in women: Executive summary of the expert panel statement of women in cardiology of the hellenic cardiological society.

The perception that women represent a low-risk population for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) needs to be reconsidered. Starting from risk factors, women are more likely to be susceptible to unhealthy behaviors and risk factors that have different impact on CV morbidity and mortality as compared to men. Despite the large body of evidence as regards the effect of lifestyle factors on the CVD onset, the gender-specific effect of traditional and non-traditional risk factors on the prognosis of patients with already established CVD has not been well investigated and understood. Furthermore, CVD in women is often misdiagnosed, underestimated, and undertreated. Women also experience hormonal changes from adolescence till elder life that affect CV physiology. Unfortunately, in most of the clinical trials women are underrepresented, leading to the limited knowledge of CV and systemic impact effects of several treatment modalities on women's health. Thus, in this consensus, a group of female cardiologists from the Hellenic Society of Cardiology presents the special features of CVD in women: the different needs in primary and secondary prevention, as well as therapeutic strategies that may be implemented in daily clinical practice to eliminate underestimation and undertreatment of CVD in the female population.