Assessment of atrial conduction time in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is closely related to increased cardiovascular risk in women of reproductive age. Atrial conduction abnormalities in these patients have not been investigated in terms of atrial electromechanical delay measured by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) as an early predictor of atrial fibrillation development. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether TDI-derived atrial conduction time is prolonged in PCOS. METHODS: The study included 51 patients with PCOS and 48 age-matched healthy controls. P-wave dispersion (PWD) was calculated on the 12-lead surface electrocardiogram. Systolic and diastolic left ventricular (LV) functions, atrial electromechanical coupling, intraatrial and interatrial electromechanical delays were measured with conventional echocardiography and TDI. RESULTS: PWD was higher in PCOS women (50.45 ± 3.7 vs 34.73 ± 6.7 ms, p = 0.008). Interatrial and intraatrial electromechanical delay were found longer in patients with PCOS compared to controls (41.9 ± 9.0 vs 22.2 ± 6.6 ms, p < 0.001; 22.6 ± 5.8 vs 5.9 ± 4.7 ms, p < 0.001, respectively). Left atrial (LA) volume index and LV diastolic parameters were significantly different between the groups. PWD was correlated with interatrial electromechanical delay (r = 0.54, p < 0.01). Interatrial electromechanical delay was strongly correlated with homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance index and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels (r = 0.68, p < 0.001; r = 0.53, p < 0.001, respectively). Interatrial electromechanical delay was positively correlated with LA volume index and deceleration time (r = 0.31, p = 0.04; r = 0.37, p = 0.021, respectively) and negatively correlated with flow propagation velocity (r = -0.38, p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: This study shows that atrial electromechanical delay is prolonged in PCOS patients. Atrial electromechanical delay prolongation is related to low-grade inflammation, insulin resistance, and LV diastolic dysfunction in PCOS.

Serum concentrations of CA 125, CA 15-3, CA 19-9 and CEA in normal pregnancy: a longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: Although cancer diagnosed during pregnancy is rare, the coexistence of pregnancy and malignancy becomes more common in view of prolongation of reproductive age. Therefore, it is important that the specificity of a tumor marker be evaluated during pregnancy to avoid misinterpretation in the follow-up of a pregnant cancer patient. The present study aims to investigate the serum concentrations of CA-125, CA 15-3, CA 19-9 and CEA in healthy pregnant women through gestation. METHODS: In this prospective study, we followed thirty healthy pregnant women. Blood samples were obtained during each trimester of pregnancy (10-12, 22-24 and 34-36 weeks). The maternal serum levels of CA-125, CA 15-3, CA 19-9 and CEA were measured using electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. RESULTS: There was no difference between the first and second trimester serum levels of CA 125, CEA and CA 19-9. However, serum CA 125 levels in third trimester were found to be significantly elevated in pregnants compared to the second trimester (median values 19.6 vs. 15.6 IU/mL, p = 0,009). Similarly, the serum CEA levels in third trimester were significantly higher than those of second trimester (median values 1.1 vs. 0.7 ng/ml, p = 0.001). It is also found that CEA and CA 19-9 assay values were significantly elevated in the third trimester of pregnancy when compared with the first trimester of pregnancy (CEA median values 1.1 vs. 0.7 ng/ml, p = 0.02 and CA 19-9 median values 11.6 vs. 7.7 IU/mL, p = 0,02). Three trimester had statistically similar levels for serum CA 15-3 (median values 17.5, 19.7 and 18.3 U/mL, respectively). The four tumor markers assay values were found generally within the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that maternal serum levels of CA 125, CEA and CA 19-9 were increased during third trimester of pregnancy. However, these elevations were within the normal range. CA 15-3 is independent of gestation and reliable tumor markers in monitoring malignancy in pregnant patients.

Diagnosis of vulvovaginitis: comparison of clinical and microbiological diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to compare the current diagnostic clinical and laboratory approaches to women with vulvovaginal discharge complaint. The secondary outcomes were to determine the prevalence of infections in our setting and to look for the relation between vulvovaginal infections and predisposing factors if present. METHOD: Premenopausal women applying to our gynecology outpatient clinic with vaginal discharge complaint were enrolled prospectively into the study. Each patient evaluated clinically with direct observation of vaginal secretions, wet mount examination, whiff test, vaginal pH testing and chlamydia rapid antigen test. Each patient also evaluated microbiologically with vaginal discharge culture and gram staining. Clinical diagnosis was compared with the microbiological diagnosis (the gold standard). Diagnostic accuracy was measured with sensitivity, specificity, positive (ppv) and negative predictive values (npv). RESULTS: 460 patients were included in the study. 89.8% of patients received a clinical diagnosis whereas only 36% of them had microbiological diagnosis. The sensitivity, specificity, ppv, npv of clinical diagnosis over microbiological culture results were 95, 13, 38, 82%, respectively. The most commonly encountered microorganisms by culture were Candida species (17.4%) and Gardnerella vaginalis (10.2%). Clinically, the most commonly made diagnoses were mixed infection (34.1%), bacterial vaginosis (32.4%) and fungal infection (14.1%). Symptoms did not predict laboratory results. Predisposing factors (DM, vaginal douching practice, presence of IUD and usage of oral contraceptive pills) were not found to be statistically important influencing factors for vaginal infections. CONCLUSION: Clinical diagnosis based on combining symptoms with office-based testing improves diagnostic accuracy but is insufficient. The most effective approach also incorporates laboratory testing as an adjunct when a diagnosis is in question or treatment is failing.