Pub Date : 2020-12-18DOI: 10.1002/9781119635307.ch30
K. Nielsen‐Saines, T. Kerin
{"title":"Vector‐Borne Diseases in Pregnancy","authors":"K. Nielsen‐Saines, T. Kerin","doi":"10.1002/9781119635307.ch30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119635307.ch30","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":375720,"journal":{"name":"Protocols for High‐Risk Pregnancies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129594389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-29DOI: 10.1002/9781444323870.CH64
J. R. Scott
Disclosure Statement Current guidelines state that continuing medical education (CME) providers must ensure that CME activities are free from the control of any commercial interest. All authors, reviewers, and contributors have disclosed to the College all relevant financial relationships with any commercial interests. The authors, reviewers, and contributors declare that neither they nor any business associate nor any member of their immediate families has financial interest or other relationships with any manufacturer of products or any providers of services discussed in this program. Any conflicts have been resolved through group and outside review of all content.
{"title":"Vaginal Birth After Cesarean","authors":"J. R. Scott","doi":"10.1002/9781444323870.CH64","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444323870.CH64","url":null,"abstract":"Disclosure Statement Current guidelines state that continuing medical education (CME) providers must ensure that CME activities are free from the control of any commercial interest. All authors, reviewers, and contributors have disclosed to the College all relevant financial relationships with any commercial interests. The authors, reviewers, and contributors declare that neither they nor any business associate nor any member of their immediate families has financial interest or other relationships with any manufacturer of products or any providers of services discussed in this program. Any conflicts have been resolved through group and outside review of all content.","PeriodicalId":375720,"journal":{"name":"Protocols for High‐Risk Pregnancies","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121958883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-29DOI: 10.1002/9781119635307.ch32
B. J. Wylie
{"title":"Malaria","authors":"B. J. Wylie","doi":"10.1002/9781119635307.ch32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119635307.ch32","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":375720,"journal":{"name":"Protocols for High‐Risk Pregnancies","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115771858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-29DOI: 10.1002/9781119635307.ch35
C. MacGregor, M. Dinsmoor
{"title":"Group B Streptococcus","authors":"C. MacGregor, M. Dinsmoor","doi":"10.1002/9781119635307.ch35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119635307.ch35","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":375720,"journal":{"name":"Protocols for High‐Risk Pregnancies","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131891769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-29DOI: 10.1002/9781119635307.ch55
R. Silver, D. Lyell
Medical terminology should be standardized, which facilitates better international medical communication. I commend Hussein et al. [1] for identifying ultrasound findings indicative of massive bleeding during hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). Although they did not focus on the trophoblast invasion degree (sub-classification of PAS), they state in their introduction, “PAS includes adherent placenta accreta (adherenta), placenta increta, and placenta percreta”. This description may be misleading. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) recommended usage of the terminology placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders [2, 3]. According to the depth of trophoblast invasion, PAS was classified into creta (vera or adherenta), increta, and percreta, and, thus, “PAS (placenta creta, increta, percreta)” was the recommended terminology [3–5]. Before the terminology of PAS, placenta accreta had two different meanings, wide and narrow: placental invasion abnormality in general, and the least severe invasion. The former and latter account for PAS and placenta creta, respectively [4, 5]. This terminology resolved this double meaning, and thus ambiguity, of placenta accreta [4, 5]. Now, there is no placenta accreta; instead, PAS (creta, increta, percreta) or placenta creta should be used to represent the wide and narrow condition, respectively. It has been 2 years since this terminology of PAS was recommended; however, I am concerned that it is not always used as per FIGO recommendation. Placenta accreta is still used ambiguously; it is particularly used for placenta creta. PubMed search with the index words “placenta accreta spectrum” yielded 276 papers (accessed 10 October, 2020). I reviewed abstracts of 100 recent articles, which represent almost all articles published from January to September 2020: I believe that widespread acceptance of terminology requires some time, and thus checked recent papers. Of the 100, 22 focused on conditions other than PAS and 9 did not have abstracts. Excluding these 31, of the remaining 69, 61 used PAS to indicate a general condition without sub-classification (creta, increta, percreta). In eight papers, both PAS and placenta accreta were used at the same time, in which placenta accreta mainly indicated placenta creta. Some papers described “PAS (accreta, increta, percreta)”. Of the 69, no papers described the terminology of placenta creta in the abstract. Is this simply because doctors may not yet be accustomed to the term “creta”? Then, should the terminology “creta” be encouraged to be more widely used? I, a non-Englishnative, cannot grasp the English language nuance. The word creta makes me think of the Greek island “Crete” (English) or “Creta” (Latin). I hope some authorities to discuss and resolve issues in terminology.
{"title":"Placenta Accreta Spectrum","authors":"R. Silver, D. Lyell","doi":"10.1002/9781119635307.ch55","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119635307.ch55","url":null,"abstract":"Medical terminology should be standardized, which facilitates better international medical communication. I commend Hussein et al. [1] for identifying ultrasound findings indicative of massive bleeding during hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). Although they did not focus on the trophoblast invasion degree (sub-classification of PAS), they state in their introduction, “PAS includes adherent placenta accreta (adherenta), placenta increta, and placenta percreta”. This description may be misleading. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) recommended usage of the terminology placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders [2, 3]. According to the depth of trophoblast invasion, PAS was classified into creta (vera or adherenta), increta, and percreta, and, thus, “PAS (placenta creta, increta, percreta)” was the recommended terminology [3–5]. Before the terminology of PAS, placenta accreta had two different meanings, wide and narrow: placental invasion abnormality in general, and the least severe invasion. The former and latter account for PAS and placenta creta, respectively [4, 5]. This terminology resolved this double meaning, and thus ambiguity, of placenta accreta [4, 5]. Now, there is no placenta accreta; instead, PAS (creta, increta, percreta) or placenta creta should be used to represent the wide and narrow condition, respectively. It has been 2 years since this terminology of PAS was recommended; however, I am concerned that it is not always used as per FIGO recommendation. Placenta accreta is still used ambiguously; it is particularly used for placenta creta. PubMed search with the index words “placenta accreta spectrum” yielded 276 papers (accessed 10 October, 2020). I reviewed abstracts of 100 recent articles, which represent almost all articles published from January to September 2020: I believe that widespread acceptance of terminology requires some time, and thus checked recent papers. Of the 100, 22 focused on conditions other than PAS and 9 did not have abstracts. Excluding these 31, of the remaining 69, 61 used PAS to indicate a general condition without sub-classification (creta, increta, percreta). In eight papers, both PAS and placenta accreta were used at the same time, in which placenta accreta mainly indicated placenta creta. Some papers described “PAS (accreta, increta, percreta)”. Of the 69, no papers described the terminology of placenta creta in the abstract. Is this simply because doctors may not yet be accustomed to the term “creta”? Then, should the terminology “creta” be encouraged to be more widely used? I, a non-Englishnative, cannot grasp the English language nuance. The word creta makes me think of the Greek island “Crete” (English) or “Creta” (Latin). I hope some authorities to discuss and resolve issues in terminology.","PeriodicalId":375720,"journal":{"name":"Protocols for High‐Risk Pregnancies","volume":"124 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114422995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：