Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.

BackgroundOn March 16, 2020, the federal government of Austria declared a nationwide lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the lockdown, screening examinations and routine checkups have been restricted to prevent the spread of the virus and to increase the hospitals’ bed capacity across the country. This resulted in a severe decline of patient referrals to the hospitals.ObjectiveTo assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rate of newly diagnosed gynecological and breast cancers in Austria.MethodsData of 2077 patients from 18 centers in Austria with newly diagnosed gynecological or breast cancer between January and May 2019 and January and May 2020 were collected. Clinical parameters, including symptoms, performance status, co-morbidities, and referral status, were compared between the time before and after the COVID-19 outbreak.ResultsOur results showed a slight increase of newly diagnosed cancers in January and February 2020 as compared with 2019 (+2 and +35%, respectively) and a strong decline in newly diagnosed tumors since the lockdown: −24% in March 2020 versus March 2019, −49% in April 2020 versus April 2019, −49% in May 2020 versus May 2019. Two-thirds of patients diagnosed during the pandemic presented with tumor-specific symptoms compared with less than 50% before the pandemic (p<0.001). Moreover, almost 50% of patients in 2020 had no co-morbidities compared with 35% in 2019 (p<0.001). Patients, who already had a malignant disease, were rarely diagnosed with a new cancer in 2020 as compared with 2019 (11% vs 6%; p<0.001).ConclusionsThe lockdown led to a decreased number of newly diagnosed gynecological and breast cancers. The decreased accessibility of the medical services and postponed diagnosis of potentially curable cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic may be a step backwards in our healthcare system and might impair cancer treatment outcomes. Therefore, new strategies to manage early cancer detection are needed to optimize cancer care in a time of pandemic in the future.

No abstract

No abstract

This is the first clinical evaluation of breech delivery in the all fours position. It is a feasible non-interventional obstetric delivery method. It seems to be safe for the fetus with reduced maternal morbidity. Vaginal delivery of fetal breech presentation, even in the all fours position, creates stress for the newborn.

No abstract

Patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer were classified by clinical risk and according to biomarker status.• Higher risk: stage III with upfront surgery and residual disease or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or stage IV.• Lower risk: stage III with upfront surgery and no residual disease.• Olaparib plus bevacizumab provided a progression-free survival benefit over bevacizumab in higher-and lower-risk patients.• A substantial benefit was seen in higher-and lower-risk HRD-positive patients.

BackgroundSpontaneous vaginal twin delivery after 32nd week of gestation is safe when first twin presenting cephalic. Aim of this study is to identify obstetric factors influencing the condition of second twin and to verify whether non-cephalic presentation and vaginal breech delivery of the second twin is safe.MethodsThis is a retrospective case controlled cohort study of 717 uncomplicated twin deliveries ≥32 + 0 weeks of gestation from 2005 to 2014 in two tertiary perinatal centers. Obstetric parameters were evaluated in three groups with descriptive, univariate logistic regression analysis for perinatal outcome of second twins.ResultsThe three groups included twins delivered by elective cesarean section ECS (n = 277, 38.6%), by unplanned cesarean section UPC (n = 233, 32.5%) and vaginally (n = 207, 28.9%). Serious adverse fetal outcome is rare and we found no differences between the groups. Second twins after ECS had significant better umbilical artery UA pH (p < 0.001) and better Apgar compared to UPC (p = 0.002). Variables for a fetal population “at risk” for adverse neonatal outcome after vaginal delivery (UA pH < 7.20, Apgar 5´ < 9) were associated with higher gestational age (p = 0.001), longer twin-twin interval (p = 0.05) and vacuum extraction of twin A (p = 0.04). Non-cephalic presentation of second twins was not associated (UA pH < 7.20 OR 1.97, CI 95% 0.93–4.22, p = 0.07, Apgar 5´ < 9 OR 1.63, CI 95% 0.70–3.77, p = 0.25, Transfer to neonatal intermediate care unit p = 0.48). Twenty-one second twins (2,9%) were delivered by cesarean section following vaginal delivery of the first twin. Even though non-cephalic presentation was overrepresented in this subgroup, outcome variables were not significantly different compared to cephalic presentation.ConclusionsEven though elective cesarean means reduced stress for second twins this seems not to be clinically relevant. Non-cephalic presentation of the second twin does not significantly influence the perinatal outcome of the second twin but might be a risk factor for vaginal-cesarean birth.