Adjunct mifepristone for cervical preparation prior to dilation and evacuation: a randomized trial
2015; 91 (4): 313-319
Obstetrics and gynecology
2015; 125 (4): 989-?
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Risk of Spontaneous Preterm Birth
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
2014; 124 (6): 1111-1119
Effect of a combined estrogen and progesterone oral contraceptive on circulating adipocytokines adiponectin, resistin and DLK-1 in normal and obese female rhesus monkeys
2013; 88 (1): 177-182
The objective was to investigate mifepristone as a potential adjunct to cervical preparation for surgical abortion after 19weeks of gestation, with the aim of improving procedure access, convenience and comfort.This is a site-stratified, block-randomized, noninferiority trial of 50 women undergoing surgical abortion between 19 and 23 6/7weeks of gestation randomized to receive either one set of osmotic dilators plus mifepristone the day prior to procedure (mifepristone group) or two sets of osmotic dilators (placed 18-24 h apart) in the 2 days prior to procedure (control group). All subjects received preprocedure misoprostol. Primary outcome was procedure time. Secondary outcomes included preoperative cervical dilation, ease of procedure, and side effects and pain experienced by subjects.Mean gestational age was similar between groups (20weeks); more nulliparous subjects were randomized to the mifepristone group (46% vs. 12%, p=.009). Mean procedure times were similar: mifepristone group 11:52 (SD 5:29) vs. control group 10:56 (SD 5:08); difference in means -56s, with confidence interval (95% CI -4:09 to +2:16) not exceeding the 5-min difference we a priori defined as clinically significant. Preprocedure cervical dilation did not differ and was >3cm for the majority of subjects in both groups. There was no difference (p=.6) in ease of procedure reported by providers. Preoperative (postmisoprostol) pain and postoperative pain levels were greater with mifepristone (p = 0.02 and p= 0.04 respectively). Overall subject experience was not different (p=0.80), with most reporting a "better than expected" experience.Mifepristone with one set of osmotic dilators and misoprostol did not result in longer procedure times or less cervical dilation than serial (two sets) of osmotic dilators and misoprostol, and has the potential to improve access to second trimester abortion without compromising safety.Use of mifepristone for cervical preparation before surgical abortion after 19weeks allows for fewer visits and fewer osmotic dilators without compromising cervical dilation or increasing procedure time.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.contraception.2014.11.014
View details for Web of Science ID 000351190700009
Mifepristone-Misoprostol Dosing Interval and Effect on Induction Abortion Times A Systematic Review
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
2013; 121 (6): 1335-1347
Obesity and oral contraceptives: A clinician's guide
BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
2013; 27 (1): 55-65
BACKGROUND: Hormonal contraception is the most common medication used by reproductive aged women but there is little understanding of the impact of hormonal contraception on obesity and metabolism. Adipokine levels (adiponectin, resistin) and markers of adipocyte development (DLK-1) are altered in obese animals and humans and are associated with increased cardiovascular risk. We sought to determine the effect of combined hormonal oral contraceptive pills (COCs) on circulating adiponectin, resistin and DLK-1 levels in obese and normal-weight rhesus macaque monkeys. METHODS: Serum adiponectin, resistin and DLK-1 levels in reproductive-age female rhesus macaques of normal (n = 5, mean = 5.76 kg) and inherently obese (n = 5, mean = 8.11 kg) weight were determined before, during and 2 months after cessation of 8 months of continuous treatment with COCs. RESULTS: The obese group alone showed a significant decrease (p<.01) in weight with COC use, which returned to baseline after COC cessation. Baseline adiponectin levels prior to COC treatment were lower in the obese group (p<.05). Adiponectin levels increased from baseline in both groups, but more so in the obese group (p<.05). Resistin levels were similar at baseline, with an increase in both groups following treatment. Circulating resistin remained elevated above baseline levels after COC cessation, particularly in the obese group (p<.05). While DLK-1 levels did not change significantly in either group, a trend for higher levels in obese animals was observed. CONCLUSIONS: COC use may alter metabolic processes via direct (resistin) or indirect (adiponectin) means, while unchanging DLK1 levels suggest they do not affect adipocyte development. COCs may directly increase resistin levels, as observed in both groups. As adiponectin is inversely related to adipocyte mass, increased levels in the obese group are likely attributed to weight loss.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.029
View details for Web of Science ID 000321086000029
View details for PubMedID 23218850
Obesity Epidemic: How to Make a Difference in a Busy OB/GYN Practice
OBSTETRICAL & GYNECOLOGICAL SURVEY
2012; 67 (6): 365-373
Obesity and unintended pregnancy are two of the major health epidemics we are currently facing worldwide. Patient education is a clinician's greatest tool in combating both epidemics but many clinicians may be uncomfortable with counselling and prescribing contraception for obese women. Overall, the prevention of unintended pregnancy in obese women far outweighs any risk associated with oral contraceptive use. This review aims to provide the clinician with a practical guide to the use of oral contraceptive pills in obese women.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.beem.2012.09.001
View details for Web of Science ID 000315003700007
View details for PubMedID 23384746
At just one-third of the American population, those with a normal body mass index are now in the minority in the United States, whereas 68% are overweight or obese. The key to reducing the prevalence of obesity and improving the health of our population is, of course, screening and prevention. Screening (as simple as a weight and height) is effective, inexpensive, and already part of the routine vital signs taken at every visit. However, providers often avoid tackling the issue of weight due to a misperception that treatment is not effective, or from fear of causing offense or compromising rapport. However, clearly more harm is done by not discussing this important health issue. Cardiovascular disease remains the number 1 killer of women, and obesity is the leading modifiable risk factor. Beyond heart disease, obesity has implications for every visit type seen in the OB/GYN office, from contraception to pregnancy to abnormal bleeding to cancer. In addition, maternal obesity adversely affects future generations, making the impact of obesity a never-ending cycle. OB/GYNs are often the only physicians that reproductive-aged women see, and, thus, OB/GYNs have the opportunity to provide a potentially life-altering intervention. Effective treatment is available and includes lifestyle changes, behavioral counseling, medication, and bariatric surgery. Time is always a limitation in a busy practice but becoming more comfortable with how to approach patients, the language to use and tailoring counseling can save time increase impact.
View details for DOI 10.1097/OGX.0b013e318259ee6a
View details for Web of Science ID 000306740700017
View details for PubMedID 22713163