-
Review Article12-04-2024
Female genital tract microbiome: the influence of probiotics on assisted reproduction
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo82
Abstract
Review ArticleFemale genital tract microbiome: the influence of probiotics on assisted reproduction
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo82
Views278Abstract
Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been evolving since 1978, with the number of techniques performed increasing over the years. Despite continued advances, some couples continue to have difficulties getting pregnant, and it has recently been considered that the microbiome of the female genital tract (FGT) may influence embryo implantation and the establishment of pregnancy. This review aims to evaluate the role of probiotics on reproductive outcomes in infertile women on ART. A search throughout medical databases was performed, and six articles met the criteria. Five studies showed improvements in pregnancy rates, with only one demonstrating statistical significance. One article showed no improvement but reported a statistically significant reduction in the miscarriage rate in the probiotic group. Further research is needed to evaluate the true potential of probiotics, namely to assess whether they effectively modulate the FGT microbiome and if these changes are maintained over time.
Key-words Abortion, spontaneousEmbryo implantationGenitalia, femaleInfertility, femalePregnancy outcomePregnancy rateProbioticsReproductive techniques, assisted, MicrobiotaSee moreViews278
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleFemale genital tract microbiome: the influence of probiotics on assisted reproduction
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo82
Views278Abstract
Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been evolving since 1978, with the number of techniques performed increasing over the years. Despite continued advances, some couples continue to have difficulties getting pregnant, and it has recently been considered that the microbiome of the female genital tract (FGT) may influence embryo implantation and the establishment of pregnancy. This review aims to evaluate the role of probiotics on reproductive outcomes in infertile women on ART. A search throughout medical databases was performed, and six articles met the criteria. Five studies showed improvements in pregnancy rates, with only one demonstrating statistical significance. One article showed no improvement but reported a statistically significant reduction in the miscarriage rate in the probiotic group. Further research is needed to evaluate the true potential of probiotics, namely to assess whether they effectively modulate the FGT microbiome and if these changes are maintained over time.
Key-words Abortion, spontaneousEmbryo implantationGenitalia, femaleInfertility, femalePregnancy outcomePregnancy rateProbioticsReproductive techniques, assisted, MicrobiotaSee moreThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. -
Review Article12-04-2024
Metformin versus insulin in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review
- Giovanna Noronha Berti
, - Igor Gutschov Oviedo Garcia ,
- João Pedro Ruas Floriano de Toledo ,
- Júlia Rodrigues Tatemoto ,
- Lais Watanabe Marino , [ ... ],
- Sérgio Floriano de Toledo
Abstract
Review ArticleMetformin versus insulin in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo89
- Giovanna Noronha Berti ,
- Igor Gutschov Oviedo Garcia ,
- João Pedro Ruas Floriano de Toledo ,
- Júlia Rodrigues Tatemoto ,
- Lais Watanabe Marino ,
- Mariana de Medeiros Legori ,
- Sérgio Floriano de Toledo
Views398See moreAbstract
Objective:
The aim of this study is to assess the use of metformin with or without insulin for the treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus compared to insulin alone.
Data sources:
This article consists of a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. The searches were carried out on MEDLINE including 7 studies, between 2010 to 2021.
Study selection:
Randomized clinical trials comparing metformin and insulin written in English, Spanish or Portuguese, with no time limit, were included.
Data collection:
Data was extracted from all the 7 articles and compared statistically when possible. Whenever data was not available or couldn't be statistically compared, the main results were described in detail.
Data synthesis:
Insulin alone is not superior than metformin with or without insulin on gestational diabetes mellitus.
Conclusion:
There is a potential viability of using metformin as an alternative compared to insulin alone in the treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. However, all assessed outcomes have a very low level of certainty of evidence and more studies are necessary to support these findings.
Views398This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleMetformin versus insulin in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo89
- Giovanna Noronha Berti ,
- Igor Gutschov Oviedo Garcia ,
- João Pedro Ruas Floriano de Toledo ,
- Júlia Rodrigues Tatemoto ,
- Lais Watanabe Marino ,
- Mariana de Medeiros Legori ,
- Sérgio Floriano de Toledo
Views398See moreAbstract
Objective:
The aim of this study is to assess the use of metformin with or without insulin for the treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus compared to insulin alone.
Data sources:
This article consists of a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. The searches were carried out on MEDLINE including 7 studies, between 2010 to 2021.
Study selection:
Randomized clinical trials comparing metformin and insulin written in English, Spanish or Portuguese, with no time limit, were included.
Data collection:
Data was extracted from all the 7 articles and compared statistically when possible. Whenever data was not available or couldn't be statistically compared, the main results were described in detail.
Data synthesis:
Insulin alone is not superior than metformin with or without insulin on gestational diabetes mellitus.
Conclusion:
There is a potential viability of using metformin as an alternative compared to insulin alone in the treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. However, all assessed outcomes have a very low level of certainty of evidence and more studies are necessary to support these findings.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Giovanna Noronha Berti
-
Review Article12-04-2024
Self-medication among pregnant women in comparison to the general population: a scoping review of the main characteristics
- Gabriela Pereira ,
- Cinthia Madeira de Souza ,
- Amanda Canato Ferracini ,
- Fernanda Garanhani Surita ,
- Sherif Eltonsy , [ ... ],
- Priscila Gava Mazzola
Abstract
Review ArticleSelf-medication among pregnant women in comparison to the general population: a scoping review of the main characteristics
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo77
- Gabriela Pereira ,
- Cinthia Madeira de Souza ,
- Amanda Canato Ferracini ,
- Fernanda Garanhani Surita ,
- Sherif Eltonsy ,
- Priscila Gava Mazzola
Views332Abstract
Objective:
An in-depth evaluation of the published evidence is needed on self-medication, specifically the evidence focusing on vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the differences in self-medication prevalence and study characteristics among different groups, while identifying gaps in the literature.
Methods:
A literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science, including articles published in the last 10 years for the pregnant women group (PWG) and the general population group (GPG). Data on study design, self-medication prevalence, medications used, and other variables were collected, tabulated, and summarized.
Results:
From 2888 screened articles, 75 were considered including 108,559 individuals. The self-medication (SM) in the PWG ranged from 2.6 to 72.4% and most studies had an SM prevalence between 21 and 50% and in the GPG, 32 from 50 studies had a SM prevalence higher than 50%. The reviewed studies varied considerably in methodology, requiring careful interpretation. While most of the studies assessed self-medication during the entire pregnancy, self-medication definition was often inconsistent between studies. Acetaminophen was the most used medication and headache was the most frequent symptom leading to self-medication initiation in the PWG.
Conclusions:
Self-medication among pregnant women showed a lower prevalence when compared to the general population. The medications used and symptoms reported were similar between groups. However, methodological differences must be carefully considered. Pregnant women should carefully follow their physicians’ advice before initiating self-medication to avoid preventable maternal and fetal adverse effects.
Key-words drug-related side effects and adverse reactionsMedication usePregnant womenSelf-medicationSee moreViews332This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleSelf-medication among pregnant women in comparison to the general population: a scoping review of the main characteristics
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo77
- Gabriela Pereira ,
- Cinthia Madeira de Souza ,
- Amanda Canato Ferracini ,
- Fernanda Garanhani Surita ,
- Sherif Eltonsy ,
- Priscila Gava Mazzola
Views332Abstract
Objective:
An in-depth evaluation of the published evidence is needed on self-medication, specifically the evidence focusing on vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the differences in self-medication prevalence and study characteristics among different groups, while identifying gaps in the literature.
Methods:
A literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science, including articles published in the last 10 years for the pregnant women group (PWG) and the general population group (GPG). Data on study design, self-medication prevalence, medications used, and other variables were collected, tabulated, and summarized.
Results:
From 2888 screened articles, 75 were considered including 108,559 individuals. The self-medication (SM) in the PWG ranged from 2.6 to 72.4% and most studies had an SM prevalence between 21 and 50% and in the GPG, 32 from 50 studies had a SM prevalence higher than 50%. The reviewed studies varied considerably in methodology, requiring careful interpretation. While most of the studies assessed self-medication during the entire pregnancy, self-medication definition was often inconsistent between studies. Acetaminophen was the most used medication and headache was the most frequent symptom leading to self-medication initiation in the PWG.
Conclusions:
Self-medication among pregnant women showed a lower prevalence when compared to the general population. The medications used and symptoms reported were similar between groups. However, methodological differences must be carefully considered. Pregnant women should carefully follow their physicians’ advice before initiating self-medication to avoid preventable maternal and fetal adverse effects.
Key-words drug-related side effects and adverse reactionsMedication usePregnant womenSelf-medicationSee moreThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Gabriela Pereira
-
Review Article09-18-2024
Neonatal and maternal outcomes of mRNA versus Non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Juliana Almeida Oliveira ,
- Eloisa Gonçalves da Silva ,
- Ayse Filiz Gokmen Karasu ,
- Anelise Maria Nicolau Silva ,
- Chris Elizabeth Philip
Abstract
Review ArticleNeonatal and maternal outcomes of mRNA versus Non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo69
- Juliana Almeida Oliveira ,
- Eloisa Gonçalves da Silva ,
- Ayse Filiz Gokmen Karasu ,
- Anelise Maria Nicolau Silva ,
- Chris Elizabeth Philip
Views307Abstract
Objective
To compare the effectiveness and safety of non-mRNA versus mRNA COVID-19 vaccines on pregnant women and their newborns in a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Data sources
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central in May 2023.
Study selection
The search strategy yielded 4451 results, 16 studies were fully reviewed. We selected case-control studies analysing non-mRNA versus mRNA vaccines. Data collection and analysis: we assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effect models.
Data synthesis
We identified 8 prospective and retrospective studies with a total of 32,153 patients. Non-mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher incidence of fever (OR 2.67; 95% CI 2.08-3.43; p<0.001), and a lower incidence of fetal or neonatal death (OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.08-0.33; p<0.001). In subgroup analyses, the Jansen vaccine (Ad26.COV2.S) was found to have a higher rate of premature labor/delivery (OR 4.48; 95% CI 1.45-13.83; p=0.009) and missed/spontaneous abortion (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.09-3.30; p=0.02), as compared with the Pfizer (BNT162b2) vaccine.
Conclusion
non-mRNA vaccines are associated with a lower incidence of fetal or neonatal death among pregnant women who receive a Covid19 vaccine, although at an increased rate of pyrexia compared with mRNA vaccines. Other studies are required for better assessment.
PROSPERO
CRD42023421814
Key-words coronavirus infectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 vaccinesInfant, newbornmRNA vaccinesPregnancy complicationsPregnant womenSARS-CoV-2See moreViews307This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleNeonatal and maternal outcomes of mRNA versus Non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo69
- Juliana Almeida Oliveira ,
- Eloisa Gonçalves da Silva ,
- Ayse Filiz Gokmen Karasu ,
- Anelise Maria Nicolau Silva ,
- Chris Elizabeth Philip
Views307Abstract
Objective
To compare the effectiveness and safety of non-mRNA versus mRNA COVID-19 vaccines on pregnant women and their newborns in a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Data sources
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central in May 2023.
Study selection
The search strategy yielded 4451 results, 16 studies were fully reviewed. We selected case-control studies analysing non-mRNA versus mRNA vaccines. Data collection and analysis: we assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effect models.
Data synthesis
We identified 8 prospective and retrospective studies with a total of 32,153 patients. Non-mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher incidence of fever (OR 2.67; 95% CI 2.08-3.43; p<0.001), and a lower incidence of fetal or neonatal death (OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.08-0.33; p<0.001). In subgroup analyses, the Jansen vaccine (Ad26.COV2.S) was found to have a higher rate of premature labor/delivery (OR 4.48; 95% CI 1.45-13.83; p=0.009) and missed/spontaneous abortion (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.09-3.30; p=0.02), as compared with the Pfizer (BNT162b2) vaccine.
Conclusion
non-mRNA vaccines are associated with a lower incidence of fetal or neonatal death among pregnant women who receive a Covid19 vaccine, although at an increased rate of pyrexia compared with mRNA vaccines. Other studies are required for better assessment.
PROSPERO
CRD42023421814
Key-words coronavirus infectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 vaccinesInfant, newbornmRNA vaccinesPregnancy complicationsPregnant womenSARS-CoV-2See moreThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Juliana Almeida Oliveira
-
Review Article09-18-2024
Immunosuppressants in women with repeated implantation failure in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos ,
- Fernanda Valeriano Zamora ,
- Lubna Al-Sharif ,
- Kush Sehgal ,
- Deyvid Vieira Silva Cavalcante , [ ... ],
- Pedro Henrique Costa Matos da Silva
Abstract
Review ArticleImmunosuppressants in women with repeated implantation failure in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo70
- Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos ,
- Fernanda Valeriano Zamora ,
- Lubna Al-Sharif ,
- Kush Sehgal ,
- Deyvid Vieira Silva Cavalcante ,
- Sarah Hasimyan Ferreira ,
- Pedro Henrique Costa Matos da Silva
Views317Abstract
Objective
To compare outcomes in patients with repeated implantation failure undergoing Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection/In vitro fertilization (IVF/ICSI) plus immunosuppressants such as prednisolone, prednisone, or cyclosporine A versus the use of IVF/ICSI alone.
Data source
Databases were systematically searched in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases in September 2023.
Study Selection
Randomized clinical trials and observational studies with the outcomes of interest were included.
Data collect
We computed odds ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.The main outcomes were live birth, miscarriage, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy, and biochemical pregnancy.
Data synthesis
Seven studies with 2,829 patients were included. Immunosuppressive treatments were used in 1,312 (46.37%). Cyclosporine A improved implantation rate (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.01-2.18) and clinical pregnancy (1.89, 95% CI 1.14-3.14). Compared to non-immunosuppressive treatment, prednisolone and prednisone did not improve live birth (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.46) and miscarriage (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.07-2.09). Prednisolone showed no significant effect in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI, clinical pregnancy (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.76-2.36), or implantation rate (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.76-2.42).
Conclusion
Cyclosporine A may promote implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. However, given the limited sample size, it is important to approach these findings with caution. Our results indicate that prednisolone and prednisone do not have any beneficial effects on clinical outcomes of IVF/ICSI patients with repeated implantation failure.
PROSPERO
CRD42023449655
Key-words Cyclosporine APrednisolone Immunosupressive agentsPrednisoneRepeated implantation failureReproductionReproductive techniques, assistedSee moreViews317This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleImmunosuppressants in women with repeated implantation failure in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo70
- Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos ,
- Fernanda Valeriano Zamora ,
- Lubna Al-Sharif ,
- Kush Sehgal ,
- Deyvid Vieira Silva Cavalcante ,
- Sarah Hasimyan Ferreira ,
- Pedro Henrique Costa Matos da Silva
Views317Abstract
Objective
To compare outcomes in patients with repeated implantation failure undergoing Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection/In vitro fertilization (IVF/ICSI) plus immunosuppressants such as prednisolone, prednisone, or cyclosporine A versus the use of IVF/ICSI alone.
Data source
Databases were systematically searched in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases in September 2023.
Study Selection
Randomized clinical trials and observational studies with the outcomes of interest were included.
Data collect
We computed odds ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.The main outcomes were live birth, miscarriage, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy, and biochemical pregnancy.
Data synthesis
Seven studies with 2,829 patients were included. Immunosuppressive treatments were used in 1,312 (46.37%). Cyclosporine A improved implantation rate (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.01-2.18) and clinical pregnancy (1.89, 95% CI 1.14-3.14). Compared to non-immunosuppressive treatment, prednisolone and prednisone did not improve live birth (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.46) and miscarriage (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.07-2.09). Prednisolone showed no significant effect in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI, clinical pregnancy (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.76-2.36), or implantation rate (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.76-2.42).
Conclusion
Cyclosporine A may promote implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. However, given the limited sample size, it is important to approach these findings with caution. Our results indicate that prednisolone and prednisone do not have any beneficial effects on clinical outcomes of IVF/ICSI patients with repeated implantation failure.
PROSPERO
CRD42023449655
Key-words Cyclosporine APrednisolone Immunosupressive agentsPrednisoneRepeated implantation failureReproductionReproductive techniques, assistedSee moreThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos
-
Review Article09-06-2024
Relationship between early age at menarche, older age at menopause and subtypes of breast cancer: a scoping review
- Lucas Casagrande Passoni Lopes ,
- Gabriel Araújo Medeiros ,
- Igor José Nogueira Gualberto ,
- Thales Baptista Gut ,
- Rafael Vasconcelos Silva Ferrazini , [ ... ],
- Carlos Antonio Negrato
Abstract
Review ArticleRelationship between early age at menarche, older age at menopause and subtypes of breast cancer: a scoping review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo50
- Lucas Casagrande Passoni Lopes ,
- Gabriel Araújo Medeiros ,
- Igor José Nogueira Gualberto ,
- Thales Baptista Gut ,
- Rafael Vasconcelos Silva Ferrazini ,
- Carlos Antonio Negrato
Views282See moreAbstract
Objective
To determine the relationship between early age at menarche, late age at menopause with specific subtypes of breast cancer (BC).
Methods
A literature search was conducted in Embase, Lilacs, PubMed, Scopus, and Scielo databases, following the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review protocol and answering the question “How early age at menarche or late age at menopause are related to different breast cancer subtypes?”.
Results
A number of 4,003 studies were identified, of which 17 were selected. Most of the included articles found a clear relationship between early menarche, late menopause and some subtypes of BC, mainly, PR+, ER+, luminal, and HER-2 tumors. However, some studies have found a contradictory relationship and one study didn’t find any relationship between them.
Conclusion
A relationship between early age at menarche and advanced age at menopause was observed with some subtypes of breast cancer, since other factors must be considered in its understanding.
Views282This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleRelationship between early age at menarche, older age at menopause and subtypes of breast cancer: a scoping review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo50
- Lucas Casagrande Passoni Lopes ,
- Gabriel Araújo Medeiros ,
- Igor José Nogueira Gualberto ,
- Thales Baptista Gut ,
- Rafael Vasconcelos Silva Ferrazini ,
- Carlos Antonio Negrato
Views282See moreAbstract
Objective
To determine the relationship between early age at menarche, late age at menopause with specific subtypes of breast cancer (BC).
Methods
A literature search was conducted in Embase, Lilacs, PubMed, Scopus, and Scielo databases, following the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review protocol and answering the question “How early age at menarche or late age at menopause are related to different breast cancer subtypes?”.
Results
A number of 4,003 studies were identified, of which 17 were selected. Most of the included articles found a clear relationship between early menarche, late menopause and some subtypes of BC, mainly, PR+, ER+, luminal, and HER-2 tumors. However, some studies have found a contradictory relationship and one study didn’t find any relationship between them.
Conclusion
A relationship between early age at menarche and advanced age at menopause was observed with some subtypes of breast cancer, since other factors must be considered in its understanding.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Lucas Casagrande Passoni Lopes
-
Review Article09-06-2024
Biochemical markers for prediction of the first half pregnancy losses: a review
- Meruyet Kuspanova ,
- Andrey Gaiday ,
- Nurzhamal Dzhardemaliyeva ,
- Maxat Tuganbayev ,
- Maksym Gorobeiko , [ ... ],
- Akylbek Tussupkaliyev
Abstract
Review ArticleBiochemical markers for prediction of the first half pregnancy losses: a review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo72
- Meruyet Kuspanova ,
- Andrey Gaiday ,
- Nurzhamal Dzhardemaliyeva ,
- Maxat Tuganbayev ,
- Maksym Gorobeiko ,
- Andrii Dinets ,
- Saule Bermagambetova ,
- Zhanna Amirbekova ,
- Gulshat Oraltayeva ,
- Dinara Omertayeva ,
- Akylbek Tussupkaliyev
Views282Abstract
Objective
26% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, and up to 10% of clinically diagnosed pregnancies, and recurrent pregnancy loss is 5% among couples of childbearing ages. Although there are several known causes of pregnancy loss in the first half, including recurrent pregnancy loss, including parental chromosomal abnormalities, uterine malformations, endocrinological disorders, and immunological abnormalities, about half of the cases of pregnancy loss in its first half remain unexplained.
Methods
The review includes observational controlled studies (case-control or cohort, longitudinal studies, reviews, meta-analyses), which include the study of biochemical factors for predicting pregnancy losses in the first half, in singlet pregnancy. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the research quality.
Results
Finally, 27 studies were included in the review, which has 134904 examined patients. The results of the review include estimates of β-human chorionic gonadotropin, progesterone, pregnancy-associated protein – A, angiogenic vascular factors, estradiol, α-fetoprotein, homocysteine and CA-125 as a predictors or markers of the first half pregnancy losses.
Conclusion
It may be concluded that to date, research data indicate the unavailability of any reliable biochemical marker for predicting pregnancy losses in its first half and require either a combination of them or comparison with clinical evidence. A fairly new model shall be considered for the assessment of α-fetoprotein in vaginal blood, which may have great prospects in predicting spontaneous miscarriages.
Key-words Biochemical markerLaboratory markerMiscarriagemissed abortionpredictionPregnancySpontaneous abortionSee moreViews282This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleBiochemical markers for prediction of the first half pregnancy losses: a review
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo72
- Meruyet Kuspanova ,
- Andrey Gaiday ,
- Nurzhamal Dzhardemaliyeva ,
- Maxat Tuganbayev ,
- Maksym Gorobeiko ,
- Andrii Dinets ,
- Saule Bermagambetova ,
- Zhanna Amirbekova ,
- Gulshat Oraltayeva ,
- Dinara Omertayeva ,
- Akylbek Tussupkaliyev
Views282Abstract
Objective
26% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, and up to 10% of clinically diagnosed pregnancies, and recurrent pregnancy loss is 5% among couples of childbearing ages. Although there are several known causes of pregnancy loss in the first half, including recurrent pregnancy loss, including parental chromosomal abnormalities, uterine malformations, endocrinological disorders, and immunological abnormalities, about half of the cases of pregnancy loss in its first half remain unexplained.
Methods
The review includes observational controlled studies (case-control or cohort, longitudinal studies, reviews, meta-analyses), which include the study of biochemical factors for predicting pregnancy losses in the first half, in singlet pregnancy. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the research quality.
Results
Finally, 27 studies were included in the review, which has 134904 examined patients. The results of the review include estimates of β-human chorionic gonadotropin, progesterone, pregnancy-associated protein – A, angiogenic vascular factors, estradiol, α-fetoprotein, homocysteine and CA-125 as a predictors or markers of the first half pregnancy losses.
Conclusion
It may be concluded that to date, research data indicate the unavailability of any reliable biochemical marker for predicting pregnancy losses in its first half and require either a combination of them or comparison with clinical evidence. A fairly new model shall be considered for the assessment of α-fetoprotein in vaginal blood, which may have great prospects in predicting spontaneous miscarriages.
Key-words Biochemical markerLaboratory markerMiscarriagemissed abortionpredictionPregnancySpontaneous abortionSee moreThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Meruyet Kuspanova
-
Review Article09-04-2024
Artificial intelligence in mammography: a systematic review of the external validation
- Paulo Eduardo Souza Castelo Branco ,
- Adriane Helena Silva Franco ,
- Amanda Prates de Oliveira ,
- Isabela Maurício Costa Carneiro ,
- Luciana Maurício Costa de Carvalho , [ ... ],
- Eduardo Batista Cândido
Abstract
Review ArticleArtificial intelligence in mammography: a systematic review of the external validation
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo71
- Paulo Eduardo Souza Castelo Branco ,
- Adriane Helena Silva Franco ,
- Amanda Prates de Oliveira ,
- Isabela Maurício Costa Carneiro ,
- Luciana Maurício Costa de Carvalho ,
- Jonathan Igor Nunes de Souza ,
- Danniel Rodrigo Leandro ,
- Eduardo Batista Cândido
Views347See moreAbstract
Objective
To conduct a systematic review of external validation studies on the use of different Artificial Intelligence algorithms in breast cancer screening with mammography.
Data source
Our systematic review was conducted and reported following the PRISMA statement, using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases with the search terms “Artificial Intelligence,” “Mammography,” and their respective MeSH terms. We filtered publications from the past ten years (2014 – 2024) and in English.
Study selection
A total of 1,878 articles were found in the databases used in the research. After removing duplicates (373) and excluding those that did not address our PICO question (1,475), 30 studies were included in this work.
Data collection
The data from the studies were collected independently by five authors, and it was subsequently synthesized based on sample data, location, year, and their main results in terms of AUC, sensitivity, and specificity.
Data synthesis
It was demonstrated that the Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) and sensitivity were similar to those of radiologists when using independent Artificial Intelligence. When used in conjunction with radiologists, statistically higher accuracy in mammogram evaluation was reported compared to the assessment by radiologists alone.
Conclusion
AI algorithms have emerged as a means to complement and enhance the performance and accuracy of radiologists. They also assist less experienced professionals in detecting possible lesions. Furthermore, this tool can be used to complement and improve the analyses conducted by medical professionals.
Views347This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract
Review ArticleArtificial intelligence in mammography: a systematic review of the external validation
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo71
- Paulo Eduardo Souza Castelo Branco ,
- Adriane Helena Silva Franco ,
- Amanda Prates de Oliveira ,
- Isabela Maurício Costa Carneiro ,
- Luciana Maurício Costa de Carvalho ,
- Jonathan Igor Nunes de Souza ,
- Danniel Rodrigo Leandro ,
- Eduardo Batista Cândido
Views347See moreAbstract
Objective
To conduct a systematic review of external validation studies on the use of different Artificial Intelligence algorithms in breast cancer screening with mammography.
Data source
Our systematic review was conducted and reported following the PRISMA statement, using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases with the search terms “Artificial Intelligence,” “Mammography,” and their respective MeSH terms. We filtered publications from the past ten years (2014 – 2024) and in English.
Study selection
A total of 1,878 articles were found in the databases used in the research. After removing duplicates (373) and excluding those that did not address our PICO question (1,475), 30 studies were included in this work.
Data collection
The data from the studies were collected independently by five authors, and it was subsequently synthesized based on sample data, location, year, and their main results in terms of AUC, sensitivity, and specificity.
Data synthesis
It was demonstrated that the Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) and sensitivity were similar to those of radiologists when using independent Artificial Intelligence. When used in conjunction with radiologists, statistically higher accuracy in mammogram evaluation was reported compared to the assessment by radiologists alone.
Conclusion
AI algorithms have emerged as a means to complement and enhance the performance and accuracy of radiologists. They also assist less experienced professionals in detecting possible lesions. Furthermore, this tool can be used to complement and improve the analyses conducted by medical professionals.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. - Paulo Eduardo Souza Castelo Branco
Review Article Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
