Uterine Prolapse in Pregnancy: A Review.

Importance: Although not a common occurrence, uterine prolapse during pregnancy can have significant effects for pregnancy outcomes and quality of life of maternal patients. Most data about management exist as case reports; a review of these cases provides some guidance about treatment options. Objectives: This review examines current literature about uterine prolapse during pregnancy to assess current information about this condition, prevalence, diagnosis, management, and outcomes. Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) were searched using terms "uterine prolapse" AND "pregnancy" AND "etiology" OR "risk factors" OR "diagnosis" OR "therapy" OR "management" limited to the English language and between the years 1980 and October 31, 2022. Results: Upon review of 475 articles, 48 relevant articles were included as well as 6 relevant articles found on additional literature review for a total of 54 articles. Of those articles, 62 individual cases of uterine prolapse in pregnancy were reviewed including pregnancy complications, mode of delivery, and outcomes. Prevalence was noted to be rare, but much more common in second and subsequent pregnancies. Most diagnoses were made based on symptomatic prolapse on examination. Management strategies included bed rest, pessary use, and surgery (typically during the early second trimester). Complications included preterm delivery, patient discomfort, urinary retention, and urinary tract infection. Delivery methods included both cesarean and vaginal deliveries. Conclusions: Although a rare condition, uterine prolapse in pregnancy is readily diagnosed on examination. Reasonable conservative management strategies include observation, attempted reduction of prolapse, and pessary use; if these measures fail, surgical treatment is an option. Relevance: Our review compiles literature and known cases of uterine prolapse during pregnancy and current evidence about prevalence, diagnosis, management, outcomes, and complications of uterine prolapse during pregnancy in order to inform our target audience in their clinical practice.

Pelvic Girdle Pain in Pregnancy: A Review.

Importance: Pelvic girdle pain is often thought to be a recent phenomenon, but this condition was described as early as 400 BC by Hippocrates. Despite being identified for years, confusion continues about the definition and management of this ailment affecting many pregnancies. Objective: The purpose of the review is to assess the incidence, etiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, diagnosis, management, and pregnancy outcomes/recovery of current pregnancies, and outcomes of future pregnancies complicated by pelvic girdle pain. Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) were searched from 1980 to 2021 with the only limitation being that the articles were in English. Studies were selected that examined associations between pelvic pain/pelvic girdle pain and pregnancy. Results: There were 343 articles identified. After reviewing the abstracts, 88 were used in this review. Pelvic girdle pain is a common condition of pregnancy, affecting a reported 20% of pregnant women. The pathophysiology is poorly understood and likely multifactorial, involving both hormonal and biomechanical changes that occur during pregnancy. Several risk factors have been identified. This diagnosis is most commonly made based on symptoms related to pelvic pain during pregnancy. Treatment should be multimodal, including pelvic girdle support, stabilizing exercises, analgesia, and potentially complementary therapies. The effects on future pregnancies are uncertain, although some limited information suggests an increased risk of recurrent PGP in subsequent pregnancies. Conclusions: Pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy is a common condition that is often overlooked as a normal part of pregnancy but has a significant impact on quality of life during, after, and in subsequent pregnancies. Multimodal therapies are available and are largely low cost and noninvasive. Relevance: Our aim is to increase the awareness of pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy as a common but often underdiagnosed and undertreated condition.

Predicting Uterine Rupture Risk Using Lower Uterine Segment Measurement During Pregnancy With Cesarean History: How Reliable Is It? A Review.

Importance: Uterine rupture during labor is a calamitous event that can result in maternal/neonatal morbidity/mortality. Lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness measurement is a proposed method to determine the risk factor of uterine rupture in women undergoing trial of labor after cesarean. Does this measurement predict uterine rupture risk? Objectives: This review examines current evidence to determine if a thin LUS ultrasound diagnosis during pregnancy with prior cesarean delivery(s) can reliably predict uterine rupture risk while attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched with one limitation of abstracts in English. Search terms used were "lower uterine segment" AND "risk(s)" AND "rupture" OR "dehiscence. Results: After reviewing 164 identified articles, 15 were used in this review. Of the studies including LUS thickness measurement, notable differences were found: gestational age at time of measurement, full thickness measurement versus myometrial thickness, number of sonographers involved, ultrasound technique (transabdominal vs transvaginal), and blinding. Other factors influencing LUS thickness include fetal weight, amniotic fluid volume, and gestational age. The most recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that an LUS > 3.65 mm should be safe for a VBAC, 2-3.65 mm is probably safe, and <2 mm identifies a patient at higher risk for uterine rupture/dehiscence. Conclusions: Study heterogeneity, absence of an agreed upon thickness threshold, poor correlation between ultrasound and MRI measurements, or physical cesarean measurements currently make VBAC uterine rupture risk prediction uncertain. Relevance: Our aim is to analyze existing literature to determine if evidence supports LUS measurement in women undergoing VBAC after cesarean to determine risk of uterine rupture.

Expanding the SOAP Note to SOAPS (With S for Safety): A New Era in Real-time Safety Education.

The challenges inherent in medical education are multiple, including recognition of different learning styles among students, incorporation of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies and outcomes measurement into the curriculum, and compliance with mandated duty hours along with a heightened awareness of patient safety required by our regulatory institutions. With the requirement that safety become an explicit part of the residency curriculum across all specialties, educators are charged with innovative ways of achieving this goal. The following commentary addresses this need and suggests an innovative approach to the traditional daily rounds' SOAP (subjective, objective, assessment, and plan) note to incorporate a second S for safety. The use of a SOAPS note elevates each encounter by integrating quality and error avoidance as a component of care. This method teaches the next generation of physicians the importance of patient safety as an integral part of every doctor-patient interaction.