A SLY FUDGING OF FACTS IS PUSHING INDIA INTO BUYING VACCINES BACKED BY THE WHO THAT MAY HAVE KILLED CHILDREN IN OTHER COUNTRIES
BY VIJAY SIMHA
http://tehelka. com/story_ main45.asp? filename= Ne190610coversto ry.asp
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Is Normal Delivery Possible after a cesarean?
What does the best available evidence tell us about vaginal birth after two cesareans?
Tahseen S, Griffiths M. Vaginal birth after two caesarean sections (VBAC-2) - A systematic review with meta-analysis of success rate and adverse outcomes of VBAC-2 versus VBAC-1 and repeat (third) caesarean sections. BJOG 2010;117(1):5 -19.
The practice of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) has swung widely over the past two decades, declining considerably since 1997 due in large part to concern about increased risk of uterine rupture. A recent consensus conference convened by the National Institutes of Health to study the evidence and provide guidance on VBAC concluded that “trial of labor is a reasonable option for many pregnant women with one prior low transverse uterine incision.”
In this study, the authors conducted a careful meta-analysis to pool all available observational data on the success rate and risks associated with vaginal birth after two cesareans, comparing this to vaginal birth after only one cesarean and also with elective repeat cesarean. The pooled successful VBAC rate among 5666 women who had a trial of labor after two or more cesareans was 71.7% (compared to 76.5% after one cesarean). The pooled uterine rupture rate after more than one cesarean was 1.36%, which represents a statistically significant increase in relative risk, but a very small increase in absolute risk for this rare complication. Importantly, the study did not indicate a significant difference in risk of neonatal death, asphyxia, or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit among VBAC after one cesarean, VBAC after more than one cesarean, or elective repeat cesarean. In addition, the rate of other serious maternal complications such as hysterectomy, blood transfusion, or fever was not significantly greater for VBAC after more than one cesarean than for elective repeat surgery.
The take-away: The authors conclude that this analysis of best available data does not suggest excessive risk associated with VBAC after two prior cesarean births, and therefore eligible women should be appropriately counseled and offered the option to undergo a trial of labor.
Tahseen S, Griffiths M. Vaginal birth after two caesarean sections (VBAC-2) - A systematic review with meta-analysis of success rate and adverse outcomes of VBAC-2 versus VBAC-1 and repeat (third) caesarean sections. BJOG 2010;117(1):5 -19.
The practice of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) has swung widely over the past two decades, declining considerably since 1997 due in large part to concern about increased risk of uterine rupture. A recent consensus conference convened by the National Institutes of Health to study the evidence and provide guidance on VBAC concluded that “trial of labor is a reasonable option for many pregnant women with one prior low transverse uterine incision.”
In this study, the authors conducted a careful meta-analysis to pool all available observational data on the success rate and risks associated with vaginal birth after two cesareans, comparing this to vaginal birth after only one cesarean and also with elective repeat cesarean. The pooled successful VBAC rate among 5666 women who had a trial of labor after two or more cesareans was 71.7% (compared to 76.5% after one cesarean). The pooled uterine rupture rate after more than one cesarean was 1.36%, which represents a statistically significant increase in relative risk, but a very small increase in absolute risk for this rare complication. Importantly, the study did not indicate a significant difference in risk of neonatal death, asphyxia, or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit among VBAC after one cesarean, VBAC after more than one cesarean, or elective repeat cesarean. In addition, the rate of other serious maternal complications such as hysterectomy, blood transfusion, or fever was not significantly greater for VBAC after more than one cesarean than for elective repeat surgery.
The take-away: The authors conclude that this analysis of best available data does not suggest excessive risk associated with VBAC after two prior cesarean births, and therefore eligible women should be appropriately counseled and offered the option to undergo a trial of labor.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
A New Dimension for Incontinence and Pelvic floor Dysfunction condition
It was a new concept inregards to pelvic strengthening .As we all think Kegels Exercise is the one stop solution for pelvic muscles here is the new concept which makes the picture wider.
Read this blog without fail
http://mamasweat.blogspot.com/2010/05/pelvic-floor-party-kegels-are-not.html
Read this blog without fail
http://mamasweat.blogspot.com/2010/05/pelvic-floor-party-kegels-are-not.html
Monday, June 7, 2010
How protected are you in CT scan?
This is a quote from a doctor at the Health Physics Society, specialists in radiation therapy, to a mother who had a CT head scan done at 1-2 weeks pregnancy:
"Brain CT is not likely to result in exposure to the unborn child because the radiation is directed only to the head. Therefore, the likelihood that radiation exposure may be responsible for malformations or birth defects is very unlikely. "
A head CT scan exposes about the same amount of radiation that one would get from the sun in 72 hours of exposure. This is considered an acceptable exposure in terms of need to diagnose a head injury versus concerns about Potential effects on the baby. The rates of abnormalities in babies do not have a significant statistical rise after this kind of exposure (normally, 30 out of 1,000 births will result in some kind of abnormality.... without CT exposure) It is theorized that there could be a slightly higher chance of childhood cancers, but this is unknown.
Preparation for a CT head scan in a woman often involves covering the abdomen with a lead apron to protect from exposing her ovaries and future ovum to radiation. Was a heavy, vinyl covered apron placed over the abdomen during the procedure? If so, there is no likelihood of fetal exposure at all as the lead shielded the fetus.
If contrast materials were used intravenously (dyes) such as barium or iodine, it is unlikely they would affect the fetus this because it is not yet utilizing the mother's bloodstream for sustenance and so would not have been exposed.
I trust that this information is reassuring.
"Brain CT is not likely to result in exposure to the unborn child because the radiation is directed only to the head. Therefore, the likelihood that radiation exposure may be responsible for malformations or birth defects is very unlikely. "
A head CT scan exposes about the same amount of radiation that one would get from the sun in 72 hours of exposure. This is considered an acceptable exposure in terms of need to diagnose a head injury versus concerns about Potential effects on the baby. The rates of abnormalities in babies do not have a significant statistical rise after this kind of exposure (normally, 30 out of 1,000 births will result in some kind of abnormality.... without CT exposure) It is theorized that there could be a slightly higher chance of childhood cancers, but this is unknown.
Preparation for a CT head scan in a woman often involves covering the abdomen with a lead apron to protect from exposing her ovaries and future ovum to radiation. Was a heavy, vinyl covered apron placed over the abdomen during the procedure? If so, there is no likelihood of fetal exposure at all as the lead shielded the fetus.
If contrast materials were used intravenously (dyes) such as barium or iodine, it is unlikely they would affect the fetus this because it is not yet utilizing the mother's bloodstream for sustenance and so would not have been exposed.
I trust that this information is reassuring.
How protected are you in CT scan?
This is a quote from a doctor at the Health Physics Society, specialists in radiation therapy, to a mother who had a CT head scan done at 1-2 weeks pregnancy:
"Brain CT is not likely to result in exposure to the unborn child because the radiation is directed only to the head. Therefore, the likelihood that radiation exposure may be responsible for malformations or birth defects is very unlikely. "
A head CT scan exposes about the same amount of radiation that one would get from the sun in 72 hours of exposure. This is considered an acceptable exposure in terms of need to diagnose a head injury versus concerns about Potential effects on the baby. The rates of abnormalities in babies do not have a significant statistical rise after this kind of exposure (normally, 30 out of 1,000 births will result in some kind of abnormality.... without CT exposure) It is theorized that there could be a slightly higher chance of childhood cancers, but this is unknown.
Preparation for a CT head scan in a woman often involves covering the abdomen with a lead apron to protect from exposing her ovaries and future ovum to radiation. Was a heavy, vinyl covered apron placed over the abdomen during the procedure? If so, there is no likelihood of fetal exposure at all as the lead shielded the fetus.
If contrast materials were used intravenously (dyes) such as barium or iodine, it is unlikely they would affect the fetus this because it is not yet utilizing the mother's bloodstream for sustenance and so would not have been exposed.
I trust that this information is reassuring.
"Brain CT is not likely to result in exposure to the unborn child because the radiation is directed only to the head. Therefore, the likelihood that radiation exposure may be responsible for malformations or birth defects is very unlikely. "
A head CT scan exposes about the same amount of radiation that one would get from the sun in 72 hours of exposure. This is considered an acceptable exposure in terms of need to diagnose a head injury versus concerns about Potential effects on the baby. The rates of abnormalities in babies do not have a significant statistical rise after this kind of exposure (normally, 30 out of 1,000 births will result in some kind of abnormality.... without CT exposure) It is theorized that there could be a slightly higher chance of childhood cancers, but this is unknown.
Preparation for a CT head scan in a woman often involves covering the abdomen with a lead apron to protect from exposing her ovaries and future ovum to radiation. Was a heavy, vinyl covered apron placed over the abdomen during the procedure? If so, there is no likelihood of fetal exposure at all as the lead shielded the fetus.
If contrast materials were used intravenously (dyes) such as barium or iodine, it is unlikely they would affect the fetus this because it is not yet utilizing the mother's bloodstream for sustenance and so would not have been exposed.
I trust that this information is reassuring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
