Can Narrowband Imaging Improve the Laparoscopic Identification of Superficial Endometriosis? A Prospective Cohort Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of narrowband imaging (NBI) to detect additional areas of endometriosis not identified by standard white light in patients undergoing laparoscopy for the investigation of pelvic pain. DESIGN: A prospective cohort trial (Canadian Task Force classification II). Evidence obtained from a well-designed cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary laparoscopic subspecialty unit in Melbourne, Australia. PATIENTS: Fifty-seven patients undergoing laparoscopy for the investigation of pelvic pain were recruited. Fifty-three patients were eligible for analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent standard white-light laparoscopy of the pelvis followed by NBI survey to assess for any additional areas suspicious for endometriosis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All identified areas of possible endometriosis were resected and sent for blinded histopathological analysis. The additional predictive value of NBI was 0% if the preceding white-light survey was negative and 86% if the preceding white-light survey was positive. CONCLUSION: The use of NBI at laparoscopy for the investigation of pelvic pain is beneficial in finding additional areas of endometriosis if endometriosis is already suspected after white-light survey in a tertiary laparoscopic unit. Further research in nonspecialized units may show additional benefit and requires further research. NBI may also be useful as a diagnostic aid for trainees.

Multicentre retrospective study to assess diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for superficial endometriosis-Are we any closer?

BACKGROUND: To establish whether the ultrasound findings of minimal endometriosis are confirmed at laparoscopy and that a correlation can be established as to the anatomical sites in this mild form of the disease. AIMS: Patients with pain and suspicion of endometriosis had an ultrasound scan by a sonologist with expertise in endometriosis as part of their pre-operative workup. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The clinical histories of 53 patients who had laparoscopy to investigate pelvic pain were reviewed. Ultrasounds were performed between 2012 and 2015 by a single sonologist with expertise in endometriosis assessments. The ultrasound findings were divided into subgroups as follows - presence of uterosacral ligament thickness, thickened pericolic fat, ovarian mobility and focal tenderness. These were compared with operative findings of those patients with superficial endometriosis. Evidence Level 3 - observational studies with controls and health services research that includes adjustment for likely confounding factors. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent (42/53) of the patients had laparoscopic findings consistent with their ultrasound findings (95% CI 68-90%, P < 0.0001). Of the subgroups that we reviewed, uterosacral thickening (P < 0.05) and thickened pericolic fat (P < 0.05) were the most associated with superficial endometriosis at the time of laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: Markers on ultrasound that reliably demonstrated inflammation (thickened uterosacral ligaments and thickened pericolic fat) were shown to be significantly associated with the disease.

Is outpatient hysteroscopy the new gold standard? Results from an 11 year prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, gynaecologists continue to investigate women with abnormal bleeding and suspected intrauterine pathology with inpatient hysteroscopy despite some evidence in the literature that that there is no difference in safety and outcome when compared to an outpatient procedure. AIMS: This prospective study assessed the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of outpatient hysteroscopy over 11 years at a tertiary hospital in Australia. Resource savings were then calculated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective database was analysed from March 2003 to January 2014 (130 months, 990 women). RESULTS: Successful hysteroscopic access was obtained in 94% of cases. Twenty-six percent of patients required a second procedure, including 132 for endometrial polyps and 33 for submucosal fibroids that were not able to be treated in the outpatient setting. On questioning, 88% of women would be happy to have the procedure again. Factors affecting success were pre-procedure pain, menopausal status and previous vaginal delivery. The difference between pain experienced versus pain expected was a major factor in patient acceptability. A vasovagal episode occurred in 5% of cases. CONCLUSION: Outpatient hysteroscopy was demonstrated to be safe, effective and acceptable to women. Provision of an outpatient hysteroscopy service saves theatre time and approximately $1000 per case. Improved techniques and technology will allow progression to a 'see and treat' service, providing further savings. With budget constraints, increasing wait times for major procedures and concerns about trainee surgical experience, an outpatient hysteroscopy service should be considered the 'gold standard' investigation over hysteroscopy in theatre.

Are endometrial nerve fibres unique to endometriosis? A prospective case-control study of endometrial biopsy as a diagnostic test for endometriosis in women with pelvic pain.

STUDY QUESTION: Can the presence of endometrial nerve fibres be used as a diagnostic test for endometriosis in women with pelvic pain? SUMMARY ANSWER: Endometrial fine nerve fibres were seen in the endometrium of women both with and without endometriosis, making their detection a poor diagnostic tool for endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Laparoscopy and biopsy are currently the gold standard for making a diagnosis of endometriosis. It has been reported that small density nerve fibres in the functional layer of the endometrium are unique to women with endometriosis and hence nerve fibre detection could function as a less invasive diagnostic test of endometriosis. However, it may be that other painful conditions of the pelvis are also associated with these nerve fibres. We therefore focused this prospective study on women with pelvic pain to examine the efficacy of endometrial nerve fibre detection as a diagnostic test for endometriosis. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This prospective case-control study conducted between July 2009 and July 2013 included 44 women with pelvic pain undergoing laparoscopic examination for the diagnosis of endometriosis. Immunohistochemical nerve fibre detection in endometrial curettings and biopsies using anti-protein gene product 9.5 was compared with surgical diagnosis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS: Paired endometrial biopsies and curettings were taken from patients with (n = 22, study group) and without (n = 22, control group) endometriosis. Tissue was analysed by immunohistochemistry and nerve fibres were counted whenever they were present in the functional layer of the endometrium. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Fine nerve fibres were present in the eutopic endometrium of patients both with and without endometriosis. The presence of nerve fibres in curettings was not effective for either diagnosing or excluding endometriosis; sensitivity and specificity were 31.8 and 45.5% respectively, positive predictive value was 36.8% and negative predictive value was 40.0%. Few endometrial biopsy specimens were found to have nerve fibres present; sensitivity and specificity for endometrial biopsy were 13.6 and 68.2% respectively, positive predictive value was 30.0% and negative predictive value was 44.1%. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a relatively small sample size and studies like this are subject to the heterogeneous nature of the patient population and tissue samples, despite our best efforts to regulate these parameters. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our results demonstrate that fine nerve fibres are present in women with and without endometriosis. Future work should focus on the function of endometrial nerves and whether these nerves are involved with the subfertility or pain that endometriosis sufferers experience. Our study does not support the detection of endometrial nerve fibres as a non-invasive diagnostic test of endometriosis in women with pelvic pain.

Endometriosis: Does the menstrual cycle affect magnetic resonance (MR) imaging evaluation?

PURPOSE: To determine if the menstrual cycle affects MR interpretation in patients with pelvic endometriosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients with either laparoscopically proven endometriosis, or a high clinical suspicion of deep infiltrative endometriosis, were prospectively recruited from May 2008 to October 2009 and January to June 2012. Two pelvic MR scans were performed for pre-operative planning; during menses and the other mid-cycle. Two experienced radiologists independently assessed image quality and disease extent. Both were blinded to patient identity, previous imaging and menstrual status. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the Kappa (k) test. Descriptive statistics were prepared using chi-squared (or Fishers' exact) tests and Mann-Whitney (rank sum) tests to assess for significant differences between menstrual and non-menstrual imaging. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement for image quality was moderate for T2 weighted imaging (k=0.475, p-value <0.001) and substantial for T1 fat saturated imaging (k=0.733, p-value<0.001), with no significant difference in image quality between menstrual and non-menstrual scans (all p-values>0.255). Readers demonstrated at least moderate interobserver agreement for certainty level of endometriosis at site-specific locations, with median k 0.599 (IQR 0.488-0.807). No significant difference in disease extent was observed between menstruating and non-menstruating scans (all p-values>0.05). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest no significant differences in image quality, disease extent or disease severity between menstruating and non-menstruating MR; thus, timing of pelvic MR for assessment of endometriosis need not be influenced by the menstrual cycle.

The effect of patient body mass index on surgical difficulty in gynaecological laparoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past three decades, rates of overweight and obesity internationally have risen to epidemic proportions. There are currently no published prospective studies examining the effect of obesity on gynaecologic laparoscopy for benign indications within a population with obesity rates comparable to Australian women. AIMS: To assess and quantify whether increasing patient body mass index negatively impacted upon the ability to successfully complete planned laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: From January 2009 until October 2012, 307 women undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery for benign pathology were recruited. Intra-operative variables included the following: ease of identification of anatomical landmarks, entry technique and number of attempts, conversion to laparotomy and any complications encountered. Any post-operative complications were recorded at the six week post-operative review. RESULTS: 94.46% of operations were completed as planned. As BMI increased, the ease of identification of important anatomical landmarks significantly decreased. There was no correlation between increasing BMI and surgical complication rates. CONCLUSIONS: Planned gynaecological laparoscopy can be performed in obese patients with a high likelihood of completion. In this study, obesity was not associated with a significant increase in complication rates or failure to complete the surgery as planned.

Outpatient hysteroscopy: factors influencing post-procedure acceptability in patients attending a tertiary referral centre.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory hysteroscopy is a safe, reliable and cost-effective alternative to hysteroscopy under a general anaesthetic for the diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding. AIM: The objective of this study was to assess which factors influenced patients' willingness to attend for future outpatient hysteroscopy. The outpatient hysteroscopy service commenced at the Mercy Hospital for Women in 2000. It provides women with the opportunity to have the cause of abnormal uterine bleeding diagnosed in an outpatient setting. METHODS: A prospective audit was conducted of 283 women attending for outpatient hysteroscopy at the Mercy Hospital for Women over a period of almost five years (May 2003 through February 2008). RESULTS: Of the women audited, 88.7% stated that they would accept the procedure in future, whilst 11.3% would not. There was a significant difference between the two groups with respect to their median visual analogue pain scale (VAS) pain scores during the procedure (3.00 versus 6.50 P < 0.0001) with the higher score in the group who would not re-attend for the procedure. There was also a significant difference between the two groups with respect to the change in median VAS score from pain anticipated to pain experienced (0.00 versus 3.50 P = 0.0001). The rate of unsuccessful procedures was significantly higher (40.6% versus 0.8%P < 0.05) in future non-attendees as well as a higher rate of clinical vasovagal episodes (25% versus 5.2%P = 0.01) in women who stated that they would not re-attend for the procedure. Preprocedure analgesia and type of anaesthetic administered during the procedure did not seem to influence whether women would attend for outpatient hysteroscopy in future. CONCLUSIONS: The acceptability rate for women attending for outpatient hysteroscopy during the audit period was 88.7%. Pain was a significant determinant of procedure acceptability; however, the acceptability rate was not influenced by analgesia or type of anaesthetic administered.

Compliance with a risk factor-based intrapartum prophylaxis program for neonatal group B streptococcal disease.

AIM: The US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) recently amended their guidelines for the prevention of early-onset group B streptococcal disease (EOGBSD) of the newborn to recommend bacteriological screening, rather than risk factor-based screening, as the preferred method of identifying 'at risk' mother-infant pairs. This recommendation was derived from population data suggesting that the effectiveness of bacteriological screening was superior to a risk-factor approach because antibiotic compliance was better with the former. Whether poor compliance and therefore impaired prevention is inherent in risk-factor screening has not been widely tested. METHODS: For a 6-month period we audited compliance with an established risk-factor EOGBSD prophylaxis program. RESULTS: During the audit period, 1243 women delivered, of whom 287 (23%) had at least one risk factor. Of these women, 193 (67%), representing 15% of all women giving birth, received antibiotics. Thus, there were 94 women who were eligible for antibiotics but did not receive prophylaxis. There were sound clinical reasons for withholding antibiotics in 68 of these. Therefore, the corrected compliance rate within our program was 73%. CONCLUSION: This compares favourably with published compliance rates with bacteriological-based programs, but we have suggested mechanisms to improve compliance further.

Do women prefer to have screening tests for Down syndrome that have the lowest screen-positive rate or the highest detection rate?

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether women have a preference for Down syndrome screening test performance. METHODS: A structured questionnaire exploring women's preferences for screening test performance was administered to women attending their first prenatal visit who wished to have Down syndrome screening performed. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty women were interviewed. The majority of women (n=80) chose a screening test with a low screen-positive rate rather than the highest detection rate. The reasons given for this preference were a desire to minimise the risk of miscarriage of a normal baby and a belief that a detection rate of 80 to 90% was acceptable. However, older women (>37 years) chose a test with the highest detection rate possible, regardless of the higher screen-positive rate, preferring to miscarry a normal baby as a result of a diagnostic test rather than miss the detection of a baby with Down syndrome. Preferences were not influenced by previous screening experience. CONCLUSIONS: Women express different preferences for screening test performance. Maternal age rather than previous screening experiences appears to be the major influence in these choices.