What Does a Pregnancy Loss Mean for Sex? Comparing Sexual Well-Being Between Couples With and Without a Recent Loss.

It is unclear whether sexual well-being, which is an important part of individual and relational health, may be at risk for declines after a pregnancy loss given the limits of prior work. Accordingly, in a cross-sectional study, we used structural equation modeling to (1) compare sexual well-being levels-satisfaction, desire, function, distress, and frequency-of both partners in couples who had experienced a pregnancy loss in the past four months (N = 103 couples) to their counterparts in a control sample of couples with no history of pregnancy loss (N = 120 couples), and (2) compare sexual well-being levels of each member of a couple to one another. We found that gestational individuals and their partners in the pregnancy loss sample were less sexually satisfied than their control counterparts but did not differ in sexual desire, problems with sexual function, nor sexual frequency. Surprisingly, we found that partners of gestational individuals had less sexual distress than their control counterparts. In the pregnancy loss sample, gestational individuals had lower levels of sexual desire post-loss than their partners but did not differ in sexual satisfaction, problems with sexual function, nor sexual distress. Our results provide evidence that a recent pregnancy loss is associated with lower sexual satisfaction and greater differences between partners in sexual desire, which may be useful information for clinicians working with couples post-loss. Practitioners can share these findings with couples who may find it reassuring that we did not find many aspects of sexual well-being to be related to pregnancy loss at about three months post-loss.

Exploring the limits of semiconductor-laser-based optical frequency combs.

We report a study on the performance limits of stabilized optical frequency combs from semiconductor mode-locked diode lasers. Operating characteristics such as the number of comb lines, comb tooth linewidth, the physical parameters that affect the independent control of pulse repetition rate and offset frequency, and the potential for self-stabilization, are explored.

Carboplatin and short-infusion paclitaxel in high-risk and advanced-stage ovarian carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To present tolerance and toxicity information on previously untreated high-risk early-stage and advanced-stage primary epithelial ovarian cancer patients treated with adjuvant 3-hour paclitaxel and carboplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with high-risk early-stage and advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer underwent maximal surgical debulking and/or staging. Paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) was infused over 3 hours followed by a 30-minute carboplatin infusion (area under the plasma concentration time curve = 7.0-7.5 mg/mL/min) for a planned six (q 21 day) courses. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients underwent 132 cycles and were evaluable for toxicity. Myelosuppression was dose-limiting. Grade 4 granulocytopenia occurred in 31% of the cycles. Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was uncommon (5%, 1%) and predictable. Delay in administration was necessary in 10 of 132 (7.6%) cycles (5 of 22 patients). Eight of these 10 delays were 7 days. Seventeen of 22 (77%) patients completed therapy without a delay. Non-hematologic toxicity was mild. A significant individual weight gain of 2.5 kg was noted. Among 19 patients with advanced disease, 16 had a complete clinical remission after six cycles of therapy. Nine patients with stage IIB-IV disease have undergone reassessment procedures (four pathologic complete responses, three microscopic positive, two macroscopic positive). Sixteen of 22 (77%) have no evidence of disease, four have no evidence of disease following a secondary therapy, one is under therapy with salvage chemotherapy, and one is dead of disease. Median follow-up is 14 months (range: 6-30 months). Comparatively, the mean carboplatin dose administered was 440 mg/m2 (95% CI, 428-486 mg/m2). CONCLUSION: Paclitaxel and carboplatin administered in this design are well tolerated, with predictable and acceptable hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. Dose-limiting toxicity is granulocytopenia with relative platelet sparing. Outpatient administration is safe.