A Retrospective Cohort Study of Patient Risk Factors and Pelvic Venous Reflux Patterns on Treatment Outcomes With Pelvic Vein Embolisation.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the effects of patient risk factors and pelvic venous reflux (PVR) patterns on treatment outcomes of Pelvic Vein Embolisation (PVE) for Pelvic Venous Disorder (PeVD). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort review assessing population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) for women undergoing PVE for PVR January 2017-January 2021. We identified 190 patients who had completed both questionnaires and who had given consent for their information to be used for research (Median age 46, IQR 40-52). The distribution of pathological pelvic venous reflux found on transvaginal duplex ultrasound (TVDUS) was analysed for all patients. Pre- and post-procedure symptom burden scores were studied using a standardised questionnaire protocol. We used inferential univariate non-parametric statistics to describe our data. RESULTS: 190 cases were reviewed; 62.6% (119/190) premenopausal, 11.1% (21/190) perimenopausal, 25.3% (48/190) postmenopausal and menopausal status not documented 1% (2/190). 10.1% (19/188) were nulliparous (average age 34 years; range 20-55 years). There was a statistically significant improvement in all symptoms and in the appearance of varicosities on TVDUS post-PVE (P < 0.05) of the ovarian vein plexus, uterus plexus, arcuate veins, vaginal wall, peri-urethral, peri-anal, haemorrhoids, labial and proximal thigh. The locations of veins requiring embolisation having demonstrated reflux were analysed; 82.8% (154/186) underwent embolisation of at least one internal iliac vein tributary and ovarian vein embolisation. Age, parity, menopausal status and previous laparoscopy did not affect symptom improvement (P > 0.05). No significant complications such as coil migration were observed. CONCLUSIONS: PVE is an effective treatment for pelvic pain due to PeVD and its diagnosis should not be limited to multiparous women of childbearing age, as a significant proportion of patients who benefited from PVE were either nulliparous and/or postmenopausal.

Pelvic abscess - to drain or not to drain?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pelvic abscess is a common gynaecological condition, particularly during and after the Covid-19 pandemic, possibly resulting from obstacles to accessing care during this time. To date, no consensus guideline on management exists with a lack of applicable randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing medical management with antibiotics alone, image-guided drainage and surgical management, despite this being a potentially life-threatening condition. RECENT FINDINGS: We present the current literature assessing risks, which contribute to failure of medical therapy, predictive models to guide management and reports of long-term sequelae. Consideration for early laparoscopic or image-guided drainage should be given to women in whom fertility is a priority, pelvic abscess at least 7 cm, white blood cell count on admission more than 16 x 1000/µl, bilateral pelvic abscess, intrauterine device in situ for more than 5.5 years and preexisting endometrioma. Pelvic abscess rupture or severe sepsis should always trigger timely drainage. SUMMARY: We present the current knowledge on management of pelvic abscesses to help guide clinical practice supported by the most recent evidence. We report the lack of high-quality evidence for many aspects of pelvic abscess treatment and call for well designed large multicentre RCTs to answer the question of which treatment yields the best outcomes.

Surgical Intervention for Uterine Fibroids. Our 4-Year Experience and Literature Review: Is It Time to Centralise Care Provision Via Specialist Fibroid Centres?

BACKGROUND: Leiomyomas are common in women of reproductive age, for whom treatment-stratification can be challenging. We assessed factors influencing pre-operative selection of surgical intervention and compare outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A literature review was performed and surgical interventions for fibroids at a London hospital (2015-2018) were retrospectively examined. Outcomes assessed were estimated blood loss, length of stay (LOS) and complications. Data were analysed using univariate non-parametric inferential statistics. RESULTS: A total of 258 cases were identified. Estimated blood loss was statistically significantly lower for laparoscopic versus open myomectomy [200 (interquartile range; IQR)=100-200 vs. 400 (IQR=200-700 ml), p<0.001]. Length of stay was also statistically significantly lower in the laparoscopic cohort compared with open hysterectomy [1 (IQR=1-1) days vs. 2 (IQR=2-3 days)]. Similar results were noted when comparing laparoscopic versus open hysterectomy [167 (IQR=100-200) vs. 500 (IQR=100-750) ml, p<0.001]. No differences in complications were reported across groups. Patients counselled by a surgeon trained in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) opted more frequently for laparoscopy (p<0.01, rho=-0.669). Estimated blood loss during MIS was 225 ml versus 545 ml for non-MIS, and 285 ml for the overall cohort (p<0.01).The length of stay was statistically significantly lower for those treated with MIS (1.37 days) versus other surgeons (2.65 days), or overall cohort (1.63 days) (p<0.01 for all associations). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery offers superior short-term outcomes when performed by experienced operators. Multidisciplinary counselling and treatment stratification should be gold-standard practice. Centralisation of care provision in fibroid Centres of Excellence is required.