There is a high rate of infertility among couples in Nigeria. This challenge is perceived differently in each socio-cultural context in which it is experienced but solution to the problem is ...adversely affected by the people's perception of the phenomenon. This study thus explored the perceptions of infertility and in vitro fertilization (IVF) and how to enhance the use of IVF treatment among married couples. This was a cross-sectional survey in Anambra State, Nigeria involving household respondents (married couples) and hospital respondents (couples undergoing infertility evaluation). Structured questionnaire and key informant interview (KII) guide were used for data collection. Altogether 600 questionnaires were administered and 589 were validly completed and analysed. The main outcome measures included perceptions of infertility and IVF treatment, utilization of IVF treatment and association between some demographic variables and IVF utilization. The results showed that infertility was perceived majorly as - destiny/supernatural powers (17.1%), threat to men's procreativity/continuity of lineage (14.3%), women's problem only (15.6%). Solutions to the challenges were adversely affected by perception. The use of IVF treatment was low with misconceptions like it's too costly (15.4%) and unnatural (7.6%), giving rise to unmet need for assisted reproductive technology. Women (especially above 35 years) were more likely to accept IVF treatment than men. Reproductive health education and awareness creation should target the misconceptions about infertility/IVF and fertility treatment should be covered by national health insurance to reduce the cost of IVF treatment and improve its use in Anambra State.
Il y a un taux élevé de stértilité parmi les couples au Nigéria. Ce défi est perçu différemment dans chaque contexte socioculturel dans lequel il est vécu, mais la perception du phénomène par les gens nuit à la solution du problème. Cette étude a donc exploré les perceptions de la stérilité et de la fécondation in vitro (FIV) et comment améliorer l'utilisation de la FIV chez les couples mariés. Il s'agissait d'une enquête transversale menée dans l'État d'Anambra, au Nigéria, auprès de ménages interrogés (couples mariés) et d'hôpitaux (couples subissant une évaluation de la stérilité). Un questionnaire structuré et un guide d'entretiens avec des informateurs clés (EIC) ont été utilisés pour la collecte de données. Au total, 600 questionnaires ont été administrés et 589 ont été valablement complétés et analysés. Les principales mesures des résultats comprenaient la perception de l'infertilité et le traitement par FIV, l'utilisation du traitement par FIV et l'association entre certaines variables démographiques et l'utilisation de la FIV. Les résultats ont montré que la stérilité était perçue majoritairement comme - destinée / pouvoirs surnaturels (17,1%), menace pour la procréation chez des hommes / continuité de la lignée (14,3%), problème des femmes seulement (15,6%). Les solutions aux défis ont été négativement affectées par la perception. L'utilisation du traitement de FIV était faible avec des idées fausses telles que le coût excessif (15,4%) et non naturel (7,6%), ce qui donne lieu à un besoin non satisfait de technologie de reproduction assistée. Les femmes (surtout au-dessus de 35 ans) étaient plus susceptibles d'accepter un traitement de FIV que les hommes. L'éducation et la sensibilisation en matière de la santé de la reproduction devraient cibler les idées fausses sur la stérilité / FIV et le traitement de fertilité devrait être couvert par l'assurance maladie nationale pour réduire le coût du traitement FIV et améliorer son utilisation dans l'État d'Anambra.
Bacterial infections are usually suspected in infertile couples seeking IVF with no clear understanding of the microbial compositions present in the seminal fluids and vaginal niche of the patients. ...We used next-generation sequencing technology to correlate microbiota compositions with IVF clinical outcomes.
Thirty-six couples were recruited to provide seminal fluids and vaginal swabs. Bacterial DNA was extracted, and V4 region of the 16S rRNA was amplified and sequenced in a pair-end configuration on the Illumina MiSeq platform rendering 2 × 150 bp sequences. Microbial taxonomy to species level was generated using the Greengenes database. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) effect size (LEfSe) was used to identify biologically and statistically significant differences in relative abundance.
Seminal fluid microbiota compositions had lower bacterial concentrations compared with the vagina, but species diversity was significantly higher in seminal fluid samples. Azoospermic subjects had more relative abundance of
and
In Normospermic semen,
(43.86%) was the most abundant, followed by
(25.45%), while the corresponding vaginal samples,
(61.74%) was the most abundant, followed by
(6.07%) and
(5.86%).
Semen samples with positive IVF were significantly colonized by
(
=0.002),
(
=0.042) and significantly less colonized by
,
,
, and lower
/
ratio compared with semen samples with negative IVF. Vaginal samples with positive IVF clinical outcome were significantly colonized by
, less colonized by
and
This study has opened a window of possibility for
replenishments in men and women before IVF treatment.
Purpose
To determine the benefits and safety of direct trocar insertion versus Veress needle technique in obese women undertaking diagnostic laparoscopy procedures.
Methods
Randomized-controlled ...trial on 135 obese women undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy and dye test for infertility was conducted. Women were randomly assigned to either direct trocar access (
n
= 68) or Veress needle access (
n
= 67) before achieving pneumoperitoneum. The same surgeon executed the laparoscopic techniques with a single-puncture technique. The primary outcome measures included total length of the procedure and incidence of any complications, while the mean laparoscopic entry time, volume of CO
2
required, and total of tries needed to attain successful entry were secondary outcomes. Intention-to-treat principle was applied to analysis.
Results
Women in both groups had similar socio-demographic and clinical characteristics and none were lost to follow-up. The overall length of the procedure was significantly lesser in the direct trocar group compared to the Veress needle group (9.9 ± 6.0 vs 16.7 ± 4.7 min;
p
< 0.001). No significant differences occurred in other outcomes including mean entry time, volume of CO
2
used, number of attempts for successful entry, and major/minor complications (
p
> 0.05).
Conclusions
Direct trocar technique may be an effective alternative to Veress needle for pneumoperitoneum in obese women for diagnostic laparoscopy. It has a comparable rapid laparoscopic entry time but a significantly lower duration of the procedure and shorter exposure to anesthesia. Both methods are equally effective as there was no significant difference in the complications recorded. A greater sample trial may be essential for more corroborative substantiation.
Clinical trial registration: PACTR201510000999192.
Preterm birth (PTB) remains the foremost global cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Thus, the prevention of spontaneous PTB still remains of critical importance. In an attempt to prevent PTB ...in singleton pregnancies, cervical cerclage, in combination with other treatments, has been advocated. This is because, cervical cerclage is an intervention that is commonly recommended in women with a short cervix at high risk of preterm birth but, despite this, many women still deliver prematurely, as the biological mechanism is incompletely understood. Additionally, previous Cochrane Reviews have been published on the effectiveness of cervical cerclage in singleton and multiple pregnancies, however, none has evaluated the effectiveness of using cervical cerclage in combination with other treatments.
To assess whether antibiotics administration, vaginal pessary, reinforcing or second cerclage placement, tocolytic, progesterone, or other interventions at the time of cervical cerclage placement prolong singleton gestation in women at high risk of pregnancy loss based on prior history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical examination. History-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 12 and 15 weeks gestation based solely on poor prior obstetrical history, e.g. multiple second trimester losses due to painless dilatation. Ultrasound-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation for transvaginal ultrasound cervical length < 20 mm in a woman without cervical dilatation. Physical exam-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation because of cervical dilatation of one or more centimetres detected on physical (manual) examination.
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (26 September 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
We included published, unpublished or ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCTs). Studies using a cluster-RCT design were also eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. We excluded quasi-RCTs (e.g. those randomised by date of birth or hospital number) and studies using a cross-over design. We also excluded studies that specified addition of the combination therapy after cervical cerclage because the woman subsequently became symptomatic. We included studies comparing cervical cerclage in combination with one, two or more interventions with cervical cerclage alone in singleton pregnancies.
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of all retrieved articles, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for this review's main outcomes. Data were checked for accuracy. Standard Cochrane review methods were used throughout.
We identified two studies (involving a total of 73 women) comparing cervical cerclage alone to a different comparator. We also identified three ongoing studies (one investigating vaginal progesterone after cerclage, and two investigating cerclage plus pessary). One study (20 women), conducted in the UK, comparing cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (salbutamol) with cervical cerclage alone in women with singleton pregnancy did not provide any useable data for this review. The other study (involving 53 women, with data from 50 women) took place in the USA and compared cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin or clindamycin) versus cervical cerclage alone - this study did provide useable data for this review (and the study authors also provided additional data on request) but meta-analyses were not possible. This study was generally at a low risk of bias, apart from issues relating to blinding. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for serious risk of bias and imprecision (few participants, few events and wide 95% confidence intervals). Cervical cerclage in combination with an antibiotic and tocolytic versus cervical cerclage alone (one study, 50 women/babies) We are unclear about the effect of cervical cerclage in combination with antibiotics and a tocolytic compared with cervical cerclage alone on the risk of serious neonatal morbidity (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.24; very low-certainty evidence); perinatal loss (data for miscarriage and stillbirth only - data not available for neonatal death) (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.64; very low-certainty evidence) or preterm birth < 34 completed weeks of pregnancy (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.40; very low-certainty evidence). There were no stillbirths (intrauterine death at 24 or more weeks). The trial authors did not report on the numbers of babies discharged home healthy (without obvious pathology) or on the risk of neonatal death.
Currently, there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of combining a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin/clindamycin) with cervical cerclage compared with cervical cerclage alone for preventing spontaneous PTB in women with singleton pregnancies. Future studies should recruit sufficient numbers of women to provide meaningful results and should measure neonatal death and numbers of babies discharged home healthy, as well as other important outcomes listed in this review. We did not identify any studies looking at other treatments in combination with cervical cerclage. Future research needs to focus on the role of other interventions such as vaginal support pessary, reinforcing or second cervical cerclage placement, 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or dydrogesterone or vaginal micronised progesterone, omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation and bed rest.
Speculum lubrication may help to reduce the pain experienced during Pap-smear collection and hence increase uptake of cervical cancer screening and repeat testing, but there are fears of its ...interference with cytological results.
To determine and compare the adequacy of cervical cytology smears and the mean pain scores of women undergoing cervical cancer screening with or without speculum lubrication.
This was a randomised controlled study of 132 women having cervical cancer screening at a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Sixty-six participants were randomly assigned to the 'Gel' and 'No Gel' groups, respectively. Pap smears were collected from each participant with a lubricated speculum ('Gel group') or a non-lubricated speculum ('No Gel group'). The primary outcome measures were the proportion of women with unsatisfactory cervical cytology smears and the mean numeric rating scale pain scores, while the secondary outcome measures were the proportion of women who were willing to come for repeat testing and the cytological diagnosis of Pap-smear results.
The baseline socio-demographic variables were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in the proportion of unsatisfactory cervical smear results between the two groups (13.6% vs. 21.2%, p = 0.359). However, the mean pain scores were significantly lower in the gel group than in the no gel group (45.04 vs. 87.96; p<0.001). An equal proportion of the participants in each group (90.9% vs. 90.9%; p > 0.999) were willing to come for repeat cervical smears in the future.
Speculum lubrication did not affect the adequacy of cervical smears but significantly reduced the pain experienced during pap smear collection. Also, it did not significantly affect the willingness to come for repeat cervical smears in the future.
The trial was registered with the Pan-African Clinical Trial Registry with a unique identification and registration number: PACTR2020077533364675.
Objectives
To determine the efficacy of zinc sulfate supplementation in managing dysmenorrhoea.
Methods
In total, 103 high school students were randomised into an experimental arm (52 students) and a ...control arm (51 students) and received 40-mg zinc sulfate or placebo, respectively, over three cycles. Primary outcome measures were the mean Visual Analogue Scale score, which measured pain over three cycles, and the frequency of nausea and vomiting. Secondary outcomes were the use of additional analgesics and the frequency of allergic reactions.
Results
Fifty participants were analysed in each group. Mean pain scores were not significantly different between the groups before administering zinc sulfate therapy. Following the intervention, the mean pain scores for the treatment (2.80 ± 2.28) and placebo (3.48 ± 2.85) groups were not significantly different in the first cycle; however, scores in the treatment group were significantly better in the second (2.56 ± 1.97 vs 3.80 ± 2.77) and third (1.95 ± 1.72 vs 3.95 ± 2.82) cycles. No significant differences were observed between the groups in the nausea and vomiting incidence and the requirement for additional analgesics.
Conclusions
Zinc sulfate reduces dysmenorrhoea severity with minimal or no adverse effects, especially with more than one cycle of usage.
Trial Registration Number: PACTR202105843292338. The trial is publicly available and was registered at www.pactr.org on 25 May 2021.
Objective
The primary purpose of this study was to examine whether pregnant women with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) are more likely to experience moderate-to-severe depression, ...anxiety, or stress symptoms than pregnant women without a history of RPL. The secondary purpose was to determine whether women with prior RPL experienced more unfavorable pregnancy outcomes if they had depression, anxiety, or stress.
Methods
A prospective case-control study was conducted that included 47 pregnant women with a history of RPL and 94 pregnant women without prior RPL. Participants 20 weeks of gestation or earlier were included. Both groups completed the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), and were followed up until delivery to determine the pregnancy outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Result
Among the 47 women with prior RPL, 10 had primary RPL (two or more miscarriages without a successful pregnancy) and 37 secondary RPL (two or more miscarriages with a history of successful pregnancy). RPL was significantly associated with moderate-to-severe levels of depression (P < .001), anxiety (P < .001), and stress (P < .001). Among the RPL group, high stress level was significantly associated with repeat miscarriage (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 5.28, 95%CI = 1.25-100.0, P = .03) and preterm labor (AOR = 6.07, 95%CI = 1.61-100.0, P = .04). Depression and anxiety were not associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Conclusion
Pregnant women with a history of RPL had considerably higher rates of moderate-to-severe depression, anxiety, and stress. Repeat miscarriage and preterm labor were considerably higher among pregnant women with RPL who were experiencing high stress levels at baseline.
Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-human Immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection promotes an aggressive disease course of HBV infection. In the only available non-Cochrane systematic review on antiviral ...therapy during pregnancy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV, none of the women studied had HBV-HIV co-infection but were either HBV- or HIV-seropositive. Treatment of HBV alone may develop HIV-strains that are resistant to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Accordingly, co-treatment of the HIV infection is recommended.
To evaluate the benefits and harms of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens versus placebo, tenofovir alone, or non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimen either alone or in combination with HBV for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV in HIV-positive pregnant women co-infected with HBV.
We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS (Bireme), Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science), and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (Web of Science) on 30 January 2023. We manually searched the reference lists of included trials, searched on-line trial registries, and contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies for any further potential trials.
We aimed to include randomised clinical trials comparing tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens (anti-HIV regimen with lopinavir-ritonavir therapy, or any other antiviral therapy, and two drugs with activity against HBV, specifically, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), plus lamivudine or emtricitabine) with placebo alone, or tenofovir alone, or non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimen (zidovudine, lamivudine, telbivudine, emtricitabine, entecavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, or any other antiviral therapy) either alone or in combination with at least two other antivirals.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes included all-cause infant mortality, proportion of infants with serious adverse events, proportion of infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission, all-cause maternal mortality, and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious, proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) (before delivery), maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion (before delivery) and maternal adverse events not considered serious. We used RevMan Web to carry out analyses and presented results, where feasible, using a random-effects model and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed sensitivity analysis. We assessed risk of bias using predefined domains, assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, controlled risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis, and presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.
Five completed trials were included, of which four trials contributed data to one or more of the outcomes. They included a total of 533 participants randomised to tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens (196 participants) versus control (337 participants). The control groups received non-tenofovir-based antiviral regimens either as zidovudine alone (three trials) or as a combination of zidovudine, lamivudine and lopinavir-ritonavir (five trials). None of the trials used placebo or tenofovir alone. All trials were at unclear risk of bias. Four trials used intention-to-treat analyses. In the remaining trial, two participants in the intervention group and two in the control group were lost to follow-up. However, the outcomes of these four participants were not described. Tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimen versus control We are very uncertain about the effect of a tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimen versus control on all-cause infant mortality (RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.72 to 6.96; participants = 132; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence); proportion of infants with serious adverse events (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.43; participants = 132; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence), and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.32; participants = 262; trials = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported data on the proportion of infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission and all-cause maternal mortality. We are also very uncertain about the effect of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens versus control on the proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.68; participants = 31; trials = 1; very low-certainty evidence), and proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA (before delivery) (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.02; participants = 169; trials = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported data on maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion (before delivery) and maternal adverse events not considered serious. All trials received support from industry.
We do not know what the effects of tenofovir-based antiviral combination regimens are on all-cause infant mortality, proportion of infants with serious adverse events and proportion of mothers with serious adverse events, proportion of infants with adverse events not considered serious, and proportion of mothers with detectable HBV DNA before delivery because the certainty of evidence was very low. Only one or two trials, with insufficient power, contributed data for analyses. We lack randomised clinical trials at low risk of systematic and random errors, and fully reporting all-cause infant mortality, serious adverse events and reporting on clinical and laboratory outcomes, such as infants with HBV mother-to-child transmission, all-cause maternal mortality, maternal hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) to HBe-antibody seroconversion before delivery and maternal adverse events not considered serious.
The presence of deleterious mutations in breast cancer 1 gene (BRCA1) or breast cancer 2 gene (BRCA2) significantly increases the risk of developing some cancers, such as breast and high-grade serous ...cancer (HGSC) of ovarian, tubal and peritoneal origin. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is usually recommended to BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers after completion of childbearing. Despite prior systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the role of RRSO in reducing the mortality and incidence of breast, HGSC and other cancers, RRSO is still an area of debate and it is unclear whether RRSO differs in effectiveness by type of mutation carried.
To assess the benefits and harms of RRSO in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 7) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid and trial registries, with no language restrictions up to July 2017. We handsearched abstracts of scientific meetings and other relevant publications.
We included non-randomised trials (NRS), prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and case series that used statistical adjustment for baseline case mix using multivariable analyses comparing RRSO versus no RRSO in women without a previous or coexisting breast, ovarian or fallopian tube malignancy, in women with or without hysterectomy, and in women with a risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) before, with or after RRSO.
We extracted data and performed meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HR) for time-to-event variables and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). To assess bias in the studies, we used the ROBINS-I 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. We quantified inconsistency between studies by estimating the I
statistic. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled effect estimates.
We included 10 cohort studies, comprising 8087 participants (2936 (36%) surgical participants and 5151 (64%) control participants who were BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. All the studies compared RRSO with or without RRM versus no RRSO (surveillance). The certainty of evidence by GRADE assessment was very low due to serious risk of bias. Nine studies, including 7927 women, were included in the meta-analyses. The median follow-up period ranged from 0.5 to 27.4 years.
overall survival was longer with RRSO compared with no RRSO (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54; P < 0.001; 3 studies, 2548 women; very low-certainty evidence). HGSC cancer mortality (HR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17; I² = 69%; P < 0.0001; 3 studies, 2534 women; very low-certainty evidence) and breast cancer mortality (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.88; I² = 65%; P = 0.009; 7 studies, 7198 women; very low-certainty evidence) were lower with RRSO compared with no RRSO. None of the studies reported bone fracture incidence. There was a difference in favour of RRSO compared with no RRSO in terms of ovarian cancer risk perception quality of life (MD 15.40, 95% CI 8.76 to 22.04; P < 0.00001; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported adverse events.Subgroup analyses for main outcomes: meta-analysis showed an increase in overall survival among women who had RRSO versus women without RRSO who were BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52; P < 0001; I² = 23%; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.85; P = 0.01; I² = 0%; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The meta-analysis showed a decrease in HGSC cancer mortality among women with RRSO versus no RRSO who were BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.41; I² = 54%; P = 0.001; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence), but uncertain for BRCA2 mutation carriers due to low frequency of HGSC cancer deaths in BRCA2 mutation carriers. There was a decrease in breast cancer mortality among women with RRSO versus no RRSO who were BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.67; I² = 0%; P < 0.0001; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence), but not for BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.87; I² = 63%; P = 0.75; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence). One study showed a difference in favour of RRSO versus no RRSO in improving quality of life for ovarian cancer risk perception in women who were BRCA1 mutation carriers (MD 10.70, 95% CI 2.45 to 18.95; P = 0.01; 98 women; very low-certainty evidence) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (MD 13.00, 95% CI 3.59 to 22.41; P = 0.007; very low-certainty evidence). Data from one study showed a difference in favour of RRSO and RRM versus no RRSO in increasing overall survival (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98; P = 0.0001; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence), but no difference for breast cancer mortality (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.19; P = 0.25; very low-certainty evidence). The risk estimates for breast cancer mortality according to age at RRSO (50 years of age or less versus more than 50 years) was not protective and did not differ for BRCA1 (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.11; I² = 16%; P = 0.23; very low-certainty evidence) and BRCA2 carriers (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.87; I² = 63%; P = 0.75; very low-certainty evidence).
There is very low-certainty evidence that RRSO may increase overall survival and lower HGSC and breast cancer mortality for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that RRSO reduces the risk of death from HGSC and breast cancer in women with BRCA1 mutations. Evidence for the effect of RRSO on HGSC and breast cancer in BRCA2 carriers was very uncertain due to low numbers. These results should be interpreted with caution due to questionable study designs, risk of bias profiles, and very low-certainty evidence. We cannot draw any conclusions regarding bone fracture incidence, quality of life, or severe adverse events for RRSO, or for effects of RRSO based on type and age at risk-reducing surgery. Further research on these outcomes is warranted to explore differential effects for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.
PDF
