A Retrospective Study of the Proportion of Women at High and Low Risk of Intrauterine Infection Meeting Sepsis Criteria

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign recently recommended that qSOFA not be used as a single parameter for identification of sepsis. Thus, we evaluated the efficacy of SIRS and qSOFA scores in identifying intrauterine infection. This case–control study evaluates SIRS and qSOFA criteria fulfillment in preterm premature rupture of membranes (n = 453)—at high infection risk—versus elective cesarean—at low infection risk (n = 2004); secondary outcomes included intrauterine infection and positive culture rates. At admission, 14.8% of the study group and 4.6% of control met SIRS criteria (p = 0.001), as did 12.5% and 5.5% on post-operation day (POD) 1 (p = 0.001), with no significant differences on POD 0 or 2. Medical records did not suffice for qSOFA calculation. In the study group, more cultures (29.8% versus 1.9%—cervix; 27.4% versus 1.1%—placenta; 7.5% versus 1.7%—blood; p = 0.001—all differences) and positive cultures (5.5% versus 3.0%—urine—p = 0.008; 4.2% versus 0.2%—cervix—p = 0.001; 7.3% versus 0.0%—placenta—p = 0.001; 0.9% versus 0.1%—blood—p = 0.008) were obtained. Overall, 10.6% of the study group and 0.4% of control met the intrauterine infection criteria (p = 0.001). Though a significant difference was noted in SIRS criteria fulfillment in the study group versus control, there was considerable between-group overlap, questioning the utility of SIRS in intrauterine infection diagnosis. Furthermore, the qSOFA scores could not be assessed.

Propofol as Inducing Agent of Elective Cesarean

Propofol as an inducing agent in selective caesarean section is considered one of the most effective methods to carry out the surgical procedure without any type of complication, however, studies have shown that anesthetics such as Thiopental produce similar effects, therefore A bibliographic review and a brief comparison with this drug are carried out in order to determine the effectiveness and efficacy of both, and their effects on the mother and the newborn.

Ethics in canine reproduction – a survey among veterinarians who provide canine reproductive services

Objective Several dog breeds suffer from health and welfare problems due to unfavorable anatomies and high prevalence of inherited diseases. Veterinarians should care for animal health and welfare but they may also be involved in breeding management including the use of reproductive techniques. Material and methods An online survey was conducted to find out how veterinarians who are involved in small animal reproduction regard ethical issues, which services they provide, how they discuss and handle ethical concerns and talk about them with breeders. Results In total, 83 participants mainly from Europe completed the online survey. Opinions on which interventions are ethical or not were heterogeneous. Most respondents (79.2 %) found it ethical to perform artificial insemination (AI) in dogs which did not reproduce naturally before. However, 62.7 % of participants stated that surgical insemination is not ethical. Elective cesarean sections are considered not ethical by approximately half of the participants. A closer look at responses to the questions of whether AI is ethical under specific conse quences suggests that most veterinarians are making ethical and value judgments in terms of what is justifiable or not. However, more than 80 % feel at least sometimes compromised by ethical conflicts. Clinical relevance This research intended to foster discussion of this topic. International strategies should be developed to support solving conflicts and dilemmas related to ethical issues in dog breeding and assisted reproduction, as well as diminishing physical disabilities and heritable diseases.