Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):796-807
Menopause causes several changes in the body that may affect the response to COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the possible association between menopausal status and incidence and outcomes in COVID-19 patients.
Combinations of keywordsCOVID-19, menopause, and estrogen were used to search the PubMed, Embase, Web-of-Science, and Scopus databases for articles reporting the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 (discharge, length-of-admission, intensive care, or mortality) in premenopausal women, available through December 29, 2022. Data from studies comparing the incidence of COVID-19 infection with the age-matched male population were pooled and meta-analyzed using a random-effects model.
Overall, 1,564 studies were retrieved, of which 12 were finally included in the systematic review to compare disease outcomes, and 6 were meta-analyzed for the incidence of COVID-19 in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. All studies reported better COVID-19-associated outcomes in premenopausal women compared with postmenopausal women. After adjusting for confounding factors, three studies found better outcomes in postmenopausal women, and two found no association between menopausal status and COVID-19 outcomes. Our meta-analysis found a higher incidence of COVID-19 infection among premenopausal women than postmenopausal women, when compared with age-matched men (odds ratio = 1.270; 95% confidence interval: 1.086–1.486; p = 0.003).
The incidence of COVID-19 was significantly higher in premenopausal women than in postmenopausal women when compared with age-matched men. Although premenopausal women may have more favorable COVID-19-associated outcomes, the presumed preventive effect of estrogens on the incidence and related outcomes of COVID-19 in premenopausal women cannot be proven at present. Further longitudinal studies comparing pre- and post-menopausal women are required to provide further insight into this matter.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):796-807
Menopause causes several changes in the body that may affect the response to COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the possible association between menopausal status and incidence and outcomes in COVID-19 patients.
Combinations of keywordsCOVID-19, menopause, and estrogen were used to search the PubMed, Embase, Web-of-Science, and Scopus databases for articles reporting the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 (discharge, length-of-admission, intensive care, or mortality) in premenopausal women, available through December 29, 2022. Data from studies comparing the incidence of COVID-19 infection with the age-matched male population were pooled and meta-analyzed using a random-effects model.
Overall, 1,564 studies were retrieved, of which 12 were finally included in the systematic review to compare disease outcomes, and 6 were meta-analyzed for the incidence of COVID-19 in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. All studies reported better COVID-19-associated outcomes in premenopausal women compared with postmenopausal women. After adjusting for confounding factors, three studies found better outcomes in postmenopausal women, and two found no association between menopausal status and COVID-19 outcomes. Our meta-analysis found a higher incidence of COVID-19 infection among premenopausal women than postmenopausal women, when compared with age-matched men (odds ratio = 1.270; 95% confidence interval: 1.086–1.486; p = 0.003).
The incidence of COVID-19 was significantly higher in premenopausal women than in postmenopausal women when compared with age-matched men. Although premenopausal women may have more favorable COVID-19-associated outcomes, the presumed preventive effect of estrogens on the incidence and related outcomes of COVID-19 in premenopausal women cannot be proven at present. Further longitudinal studies comparing pre- and post-menopausal women are required to provide further insight into this matter.
, , , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):808-817
, , , , , , , , To assess the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of misoprostol in the treatment of incomplete miscarriage.
The PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials databases (clinicaltrials.gov) were searched for the relevant articles, and search strategies were developed using a combination of thematic Medical Subject Headings terms and text words. The last search was conducted on July 4, 2022. No language restrictions were applied.
Randomized clinical trials with patients of gestational age up to 6/7 weeks with a diagnosis of incomplete abortion and who were managed with at least 1 of the 3 types of treatment studied were included. A total of 8,087 studies were screened.
Data were synthesized using the statistical package Review Manager V.5.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom). For dichotomous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were derived for each study. Heterogeneity between the trial results was evaluated using the standard test, I2 statistic.
When comparing misoprostol with medical vacuum aspiration (MVA), the rate of complete abortion was higher in the MVA group (OR = 0.16; 95%CI = 0.07–0.36). Hemorrhage or heavy bleeding was more common in the misoprostol group (OR = 3.00; 95%CI = 1.96–4.59), but pain after treatment was more common in patients treated with MVA (OR = 0.65; 95%CI = 0.52–0.80). No statistically significant differences were observed in the general acceptability of the treatments.
Misoprostol has been determined as a safe option with good acceptance by patients.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):808-817
, , , , , , , , To assess the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of misoprostol in the treatment of incomplete miscarriage.
The PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials databases (clinicaltrials.gov) were searched for the relevant articles, and search strategies were developed using a combination of thematic Medical Subject Headings terms and text words. The last search was conducted on July 4, 2022. No language restrictions were applied.
Randomized clinical trials with patients of gestational age up to 6/7 weeks with a diagnosis of incomplete abortion and who were managed with at least 1 of the 3 types of treatment studied were included. A total of 8,087 studies were screened.
Data were synthesized using the statistical package Review Manager V.5.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom). For dichotomous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were derived for each study. Heterogeneity between the trial results was evaluated using the standard test, I2 statistic.
When comparing misoprostol with medical vacuum aspiration (MVA), the rate of complete abortion was higher in the MVA group (OR = 0.16; 95%CI = 0.07–0.36). Hemorrhage or heavy bleeding was more common in the misoprostol group (OR = 3.00; 95%CI = 1.96–4.59), but pain after treatment was more common in patients treated with MVA (OR = 0.65; 95%CI = 0.52–0.80). No statistically significant differences were observed in the general acceptability of the treatments.
Misoprostol has been determined as a safe option with good acceptance by patients.
, , , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):818-823
, , , , , , Cervical cancer (CC) is caused by persistent infection of human papillomavirus of high oncogenic risk (hr-HPV); however, several cofactors are important in its carcinogenesis, such as smoking, multiparity, and prolonged use of oral hormonal contraceptives (COCs). Worldwide, 16% of women use COCs, whereas in Brazil this rate is of ~ 30%. The safety and adverse effects of COCs are widely discussed in the literature, including the increase in carcinogenic risk. Due to the existence of several drugs, combinations, and dosages of COCs, it is hard to have uniform information in epidemiological studies. Our objective was to perform a narrative review on the role of COCs use in the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer. Several populational studies have suggested an increase in the incidence of cervical cancer for those who have used COCs for > 5 years, but other available studies reach controversial and contradictory results regarding the action of COCs in the development of CC.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(12):818-823
, , , , , , Cervical cancer (CC) is caused by persistent infection of human papillomavirus of high oncogenic risk (hr-HPV); however, several cofactors are important in its carcinogenesis, such as smoking, multiparity, and prolonged use of oral hormonal contraceptives (COCs). Worldwide, 16% of women use COCs, whereas in Brazil this rate is of ~ 30%. The safety and adverse effects of COCs are widely discussed in the literature, including the increase in carcinogenic risk. Due to the existence of several drugs, combinations, and dosages of COCs, it is hard to have uniform information in epidemiological studies. Our objective was to perform a narrative review on the role of COCs use in the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer. Several populational studies have suggested an increase in the incidence of cervical cancer for those who have used COCs for > 5 years, but other available studies reach controversial and contradictory results regarding the action of COCs in the development of CC.