Time filter

Source Type

Papanikolaou E.G.,Aristotle University of Thessaloniki | Humaidan P.,Fertility Clinic | Polyzos N.P.,Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research PACMeR | Tarlatzis B.,Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Seminars in Reproductive Medicine

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), an iatrogenic complication of ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction, is a potentially life-threatening condition. Exogenous human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administered for final oocyte maturation and endogenous hCG produced by a developing pregnancy are fundamental in the development of the disease. Vascular endothelial growth factor is the key molecule mediating the pathophysiology of the syndrome, and genetic predisposition might play a role. Because the most severe cases are usually the late OHSS cases that occur when a pregnancy is established, several predictive markers have been introduced to identify the high-risk patient profile and consequently develop preventive strategies. This article reviews the most recent evidence evaluating the accuracy of different OHSS prediction parameters. Stratification was attempted according to the phase of the ovarian stimulation that the patients undergo. Anti-Müllerian hormone and the number of follicles seen on ultrasound seem promising discriminating factors, whereas prediction models that include age, antral follicle count, and estrogen levels on the day of ovulation triggering provide variable sensitivity and specificity. Until reliable genetic tests are available, and considering that the occurrence of pregnancy is unpredictable, the use of prognostic factors will be mainly indicative of risk rather than preventive of OHSS. Copyright © 2010 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. Source

Kamposioras K.,Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research PACMeR | Kamposioras K.,University General Hospital Attikon | Pentheroudakis G.,University of Ioannina | Pectasides D.,University General Hospital Attikon | Pavlidis N.,University of Ioannina
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

Introduction: Although more than 90% of melanomas have a cutaneous origin, occasionally it is discovered as a secondary deposit without evident primary site. The aim of this study was to systematically review published literature and analyse data on incidence, presentation, therapeutic interventions, survival and prognostic factors. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, (search terms Melanom*, unknown origin, unknown primary, indolent, occult) and the abstracts from major congresses of the last 4 years and perused the references of the retrieved relevant articles. Results: 4348 patients with MUP were reported along with 132,. 643 patients with Melanoma of Known Primary (MKP). The incidence of MUP was 3.2%. The male to female ratio was 2:1 while the age peak was in the 4th and 5th decades. MUP patients harbouring nodal disease had a median overall survival ranging between 24 and 127 months, 5-year survival rate between 28.6% and 75.6% and 10-year survival rate between 18.8% and 62.9%. MUP patients with visceral disease had median survival times between 3 and 16 months, and 5-year survival rates between 5.9% and 18%. Presence of tumour regression in metastatic sites and low nodal burden were associated with favourable outcome. Potentially curative surgical treatment offered survival advantage in comparison to patients with residual metastatic foci. MUP patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy paradoxically seemed to fare worse compared to patients observed. Conclusions: This is the first review to bring together the information of 89 years and to analyze all the potential information accumulated. Although a well know entity no consensus is reached in order to describe MUP presentation, management or prognosis. © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Source

Polyzos N.P.,Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research PACMeR
BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

To examine whether treatment of periodontal disease with scaling and root planing during pregnancy is associated with a reduction in the preterm birth rate. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Central Trials Registry, ISI Web of Science, Medline, and reference lists of relevant studies to July 2010; hand searches in key journals. Randomised controlled trials including pregnant women with documented periodontal disease randomised to either treatment with scaling and root planing or no treatment. Data were extracted by two independent investigators, and a consensus was reached with the involvement a third. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and trials were considered either high or low quality. The primary outcome was preterm birth (<37 weeks). Secondary outcomes were low birthweight infants (<2500 g), spontaneous abortions/stillbirths, and overall adverse pregnancy outcome (preterm birth <37 weeks and spontaneous abortions/stillbirths). 11 trials (with 6558 women) were included. Five trials were considered to be of high methodological quality (low risk of bias), whereas the rest were low quality (high or unclear risk of bias). Results among low and high quality trials were consistently diverse; low quality trials supported a beneficial effect of treatment, and high quality trials provided clear evidence that no such effect exists. Among high quality studies, treatment had no significant effect on the overall rate of preterm birth (odds ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.40; P=0.15). Furthermore, treatment did not reduce the rate of low birthweight infants (odds ratio 1.07, 0.85 to 1.36; P=0.55), spontaneous abortions/stillbirths (0.79, 0.51 to 1.22; P=0.28), or overall adverse pregnancy outcome (preterm births <37 weeks and spontaneous abortions/stillbirths) (1.09, 0.91 to 1.30; P=0.34). Treatment of periodontal disease with scaling and root planing cannot be considered to be an efficient way of reducing the incidence of preterm birth. Women may be advised to have periodical dental examinations during pregnancy to test their dental status and may have treatment for periodontal disease. However, they should be told that such treatment during pregnancy is unlikely to reduce the risk of preterm birth or low birthweight infants. Source

Valachis A.,Onkologkliniken Sormland | Tsali L.,General Hospital of Lamia | Tsali L.,Aristotle University of Thessaloniki | Pesce L.L.,University of Chicago | And 5 more authors.
Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey

Background: An increased number of women are expected to conceive after the diagnosis of early breast cancer. Most physicians recommend that pregnancy be delayed by 2 to 3 years after diagnosis of early breast cancer, but this recommendation is based on data from trials with small patient cohorts. Furthermore, a healthy mother effect (HME) selection bias may be operative in most of these studies, because women undergoing childbearing after treatment were healthier when compared with the control group. AIM:: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials corrected for HME bias so as to assess the effect of pregnancy (at least 10 months after diagnosis) versus no pregnancy on overall survival of primary breast cancer patients less than 45 years. METHODS:: We searched MEDLINE and Thomson Reuters (ISI) Web of Knowledge for eligible studies. From each study we extracted the relative hazard ratio or, if not provided, all the necessary data to impute it. In cases where the duration from diagnosis to pregnancy was not reported, we extracted relevant data to estimate it. RESULTS:: Our electronic search strategy yielded 1623 hits pertaining to 20 potentially eligible studies involving 49,370 premenopausal breast cancer patients. Ten studies were eligible after considering HME potential bias in matching controls. Among these, 9 studies (pregnant 1089, matched-controls 13051) contained data appropriate for analysis. Overall survival was statistically higher among patients who became pregnant compared to controls: fixed effect model estimated pooled hazard ratio for death 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.62). No study heterogeneity was observed: Q = 10.4, P = 0.17; I = 48%. Conclusion: The pooled available evidence indicates that in early breast cancer patients, pregnancy that occurs at least 10 months after diagnosis does not jeopardize prognosis and may actually confer significant survival benefit. Target Audience: Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians Learning Objectives: After completing this CME activity, physicians should be better able to assess the effect pregnancy has on long-term survival in primary breast cancer patients under age 45; counsel patients on the safety of pregnancy after breast cancer diagnosis and treatment; and interpret how pregnancy may be associated with improved breast cancer survival. Copyright © 2011 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Source

Humaidan P.,University of Southern Denmark | Papanikolaou E.G.,Aristotle University of Thessaloniki | Kyrou D.,Aristotle University of Thessaloniki | Alsbjerg B.,Fertility Clinic | And 3 more authors.
Reproductive BioMedicine Online

In stimulated IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles, the luteal phase is disrupted, necessitating luteal-phase supplementation. The most plausible reason behind this is the ovarian multifollicular development obtained after ovarian stimulation, resulting in supraphysiological steroid concentrations and consecutive inhibition of LH secretion by the pituitary via negative feedback at the level of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. With the introduction of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone-(GnRH) antagonist, an alternative to human chorionic gonadotrophin triggering of final oocyte maturation is the use of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) which reduces or even prevents ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Interestingly, the current regimens of luteal support after HCG triggering are not sufficient to secure the early implanting embryo after GnRHa triggering. This review discusses the luteal-phase insufficiency seen after GnRHa triggering and the various trials that have been performed to assess the most optimal luteal support in relation to GnRHa triggering. Although more research is needed, GnRHa triggering is now an alternative to HCG triggering, combining a significant reduction in OHSS with high ongoing pregnancy rates. Stimulation of the ovaries for IVF treatment induces the growth of multiple follicles, resulting in the aspiration of several oocytes. During the early years of IVF treatment it became obvious that the stimulation per se induced an unphysiological hormonal level during the luteal phase - the phase after egg transfer - necessitating hormonal support with vaginally applied progesterone to obtain ongoing pregnancies. With the introduction of the gonadotrophin- releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol (short protocol) it became possible to perform final oocyte maturation with a GnRH agonist instead of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG). The first studies applying this concept, however, showed a very poor pregnancy rate, despite standard luteal-phase support with progesterone. This review discusses the reason for the poor results and the newest studies, using GnRH agonist instead of HCG, now showing a normalization of pregnancy rates due to modifications of the luteal-phase support and with the benefit of a protocol which has a reduced risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. © 2011, Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source

Discover hidden collaborations