The evidence behind the use of LASER for genitourinary syndrome of menopause, vulvovaginal atrophy, urinary incontinence and lichen sclerosus: A state-of-the-art review.

In recent years, LASER has been introduced as a minimally invasive treatment for a broad range of vaginal and vulvar symptoms and diseases. However, the efficacy and safety of vaginal and vulvar LASER has continuously been questioned. The aim of this study is to create an overview of the current literature and discuss the controversies within the use of LASER for genitourinary syndrome of menopause, vulvovaginal atrophy, urinary incontinence and lichen sclerosus. A search string was built in PubMed. The search was commenced on August 25, 2021 and closed on October 27, 2021. Two authors screened the studies in Covidence for inclusion according to the eligibility criteria in the protocol. The data were extracted from the studies and are reported in both text and tables. This review included 114 papers, of which 15 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The effect of LASER as a vaginal treatment was investigated for genitourinary syndrome of menopause in 36 studies (six RCTs), vulvovaginal atrophy in 34 studies (four RCTs) and urinary incontinence in 30 studies (two RCTs). Ten studies (three RCTs) investigated the effect of vulvar treatment for lichen sclerosus. Half of the included RCTs, irrespective of indication, did not find a significant difference in improvement in women treated with vaginal CO2 or Er:YAG LASER compared with their respective controls. However, most non-comparative studies reported significant improvement after exposure to vaginal or vulvar LASER across all indications. Included studies generally had a short follow-up period and only a single RCT followed their participants for more than 6 months post treatment. Adverse events were reported as mild and transient and 99 studies including 51 094 patients provided information of no serious adverse events. In conclusion, this review found that the effect of vaginal and vulvar LASER decreases with higher study quality where potential biases have been eliminated. We therefore stress that all patients who are treated with vaginal or vulvar LASER should be carefully monitored and that LASER for those indications as a treatment should be kept on a research level until further high-quality evidence is available.

Impact of Early COVID-19 Pandemic on Common Ophthalmic Procedures Volumes: A US Claims-Based Analysis.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound effect on the delivery of healthcare in the United States and globally. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on common ophthalmic procedure utilization and normalization to pre-pandemic daily rates. METHODS: Leveraging a national database, Clinformatics™ DataMart (OptumInsight, Eden Prairie, MN), procedure frequencies and daily averages, defined by Current Procedural Terminology codes, of common elective and non-elective procedures within multiple ophthalmology sub-specialties were calculated. Interrupted time-series analysis with a Poisson regression model and smooth spline functions was used to model trends in pre-COVID-19 (January 1, 2018-February 29, 2020) and COVID-19 (March 1, 2020-June 30, 2020) periods. RESULTS: Of 3,583,231 procedures in the study period, 339,607 occurred during the early COVID-19 time period. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections (44,412 to 39,774, RR 1.01, CI 0.99-1.02; p = .212), retinal detachment repairs (1,290 to 1,086, RR 1.07, CI 0.99-1.15; p = .103), and glaucoma drainage implants/trabeculectomies (706 to 487, RR 0.93, CI 0.83-1.04; p = .200) remained stable. Cataract surgery (61,421 to 33,054, RR 0.77; CI 0.76-0.78; p < .001), laser peripheral iridotomy (1,875 to 890, RR 0.82, CI 0.76-0.88; p < .001), laser trabeculoplasty (2,680 to 1,753, RR 0.79, CI 0.74-0.84; p < .001), and blepharoplasty (1,522 to 797, RR 0.71, CI 0.66-0.77; p < .001) all declined significantly. All procedures except laser iridotomy returned to pre-COVID19 rates by June 2020. CONCLUSION: Most ophthalmic procedures that significantly declined during the COVID-19 pandemic were elective procedures. Among these, the majority returned to 2019 daily averages by June 2020.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the stage and the type of surgical treatment of laryngeal cancer.

PURPOSE: Changes in the entire health care system during COVID-19 epidemic have affected the management of patients with head and neck cancer and posed several clinical challenges for ENT surgeons. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the effect of COVID-19 on the stage and the type of surgical treatments used in laryngeal cancer (including total laryngectomy, supracricoid partial laryngectomy (SCPL) and transoral laser microsurgery (TLM)) and also to compare the results of April 2020 to April 2021 with the previous year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed on all patients with a diagnosis of laryngeal cancer who underwent surgery in the tertiary care center from April 2020 to April 2021 and the year before the pandemic in the same time. Demographic, cancer stage, and treatment data of all patients were recorded and analysis in two groups. RESULTS: Patients referred at the time of the virus outbreak; 111 were male and 5 were female, and in the group of patients referred before COVID-19, 90 were male and 12 were female. The type of surgical treatment of laryngeal cancer, mean time elapsed from sampling to surgery, stage of disease and mean tumor volume was statistically significant differences in patients before and during the outbreak. CONCLUSION: Patients who referred for diagnosis and treatment at the time of COVID-19 outbreak had more advanced stages of the disease and also the tumor volume was higher in them than patients who had referred before the outbreak. It is necessary to provide new solutions, education and treatment management for patients with laryngeal cancer in such pandemics.