Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy is a rare but potentially life-threatening and often misdiagnosed condition. This is particularly pertinent for Caesarean scar ectopic pregnancies, the prevalence of which is increasing due to the rising proportion of women having Caesarean sections (Litwicka and Greco, 2011). Practitioners should be aware of non-tubal pregnancies to aid more efficient diagnosis, optimise management and increase patient safety.

The direct antiglobulin test (DAT; sometimes referred to as the "Coombs" test) continues to be one of the most widely used assays in laboratory medicine. First described about 70 years ago, it is elegantly simple in design, yet it is widely complex in its applications and interpretations, and it is prone to false-positive and false-negative results. The overall objective of our review is to provide practicing pathologists with a guide to identify situations when the DAT is useful and to highlight disease-specific shortcomings as well as general pitfalls of the test. To accomplish these goals, this review will discuss the following: (1) the history of the DAT, (2) how the test is performed in the clinical laboratory, (3) clinical situations for its use, (4) its interpretation, and (5) the pitfalls associated with DAT assays, including causes of false positivity.

ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to estimate the risk of recurrent obstetric anal sphincter injury (rOASI) in women who have suffered anal sphincter injury in their previous pregnancy and analyse risk factors for recurrence through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesA review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches were made in Ovid MEDLINE (1996 to May 2015), PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar, including bibliographies and conference proceedings.Methods of study selectionObservational studies (cohort/case–control) evaluating rOASI and risk factors were selected by two reviewers who also analysed methodological quality of those studies. Pooled odds ratios (OR) for rOASI and individual risk factors were calculated using RevMan 5.3.Tabulation, integration and resultsFrom the eight studies assessed, overall risk of rOASI was 6.3 % compared with a 5.7 % risk of OASI in the first pregnancy. The risk in parous women with no previous OASI was 1.5 %. Factors that increased the risk in a future pregnancy were instrumental delivery with forceps [OR 3.12, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.42–4.01) or ventouse (OR 2.44, 95 % CI 1.83–3.25), previous fourth-degree tear (OR 1.7, 95 % CI 1.24–2.36) and birth weight ≥4 kg (OR 2.29, 95 % CI 2.06–2.54). Maternal age ≥35 years marginally increased the risk (OR 1.16, 95 % CI 1–1.35).ConclusionThe overall rate of rOASI and associated risk factors for recurrence are similar to the rate and risk factors of primary OASI. Antenatal decisions could be based on assessment of foetal weight and intrapartum decisions based upon the requirement for an instrumental delivery.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2893-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundUrodynamics (UDS) has been considered the gold standard test for detrusor overactivity (DO) in women with an overactive bladder (OAB). Bladder ultrasonography to measure bladder wall thickness (BWT) is less invasive and has been proposed as an alternative test.ObjectivesTo estimate the reliability, reproducibility, accuracy and acceptability of BWT in women with OAB, measured by ultrasonography, in the diagnosis of DO; to explore the role of UDS and its impact on treatment outcomes; and to conduct an economic evaluation of alternative care pathways.DesignA cross-sectional test accuracy study.Setting22 UK hospitals.Participants687 women with OAB.MethodsBWT was measured using transvaginal ultrasonography, and DO was assessed using UDS, which was performed blind to ultrasonographic findings. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were assessed by repeated measurements from scans in 37 and 57 women, respectively, and by repeated scans in 27 women. Sensitivity and specificity were computed at pre-specified thresholds. The smallest real differences detectable of BWT were estimated using one-way analysis of variance. The pain and acceptability of both tests were evaluated by a questionnaire. Patient symptoms were measured before testing and after 6 and 12 months using the International Consultation on Incontinence modular Questionnaire Overactive Bladder (short form) (ICIQ-OAB) questionnaire and a global impression of improvement elicited at 12 months. Interventions and patient outcomes were analysed according to urodynamic diagnoses and BWT measurements. A decision-analytic model compared the cost-effectiveness of care strategies using UDS, ultrasonography or clinical history, estimating the cost per woman successfully treated and the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).ResultsBWT showed very low sensitivity and specificity at all pre-specified cut-off points, and there was no evidence of discrimination at any threshold (p = 0.25). Extensive sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not alter the interpretation of these findings. The smallest detectable difference in BWT was estimated to be 2 mm. Pain levels following both tests appeared relatively low. The proportion of women who found the test ‘totally acceptable’ was significantly higher with ultrasonography than UDS (81% vs. 56%;p < 0.001). Overall, subsequent treatment was highly associated with urodynamic diagnosis (p < 0.0001). There was no evidence that BWT had any relationship with the global impression of improvement responses at 20 months (p = 0.4). Bladder ultrasonography was more costly and less effective than the other strategies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of basing treatment on the primary clinical presentation compared with UDS was £491,500 per woman successfully treated and £60,200 per QALY. Performing a UDS in those women with a clinical history of mixed urinary incontinence had an ICER of £19,500 per woman successfully treated and £12,700 per QALY compared with the provision of urodynamic to all women. For DO cases detected, UDS was the most cost-effective strategy.ConclusionThere was no evidence that BWT had any relationship with DO, regardless of the cut-off point, nor any relationship to symptoms as measured by the ICIQ-OAB. Bladder ultrasonography has no diagnostic or prognostic value as a test in this condition. Furthermore, despite its greater acceptability, BWT measurement was not sufficiently reliable or reproducible.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN46820623.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.