Current standards for assessing pregnancy status before surgery are subjective and should be replaced with definitive, objective evidence

Keiran D Clement, Andreas Luhmann, Michael Wilson (Lead / Corresponding author), Pradeep Patil

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    2 Citations (Scopus)
    136 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    We report a case of a young woman admitted electively for laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication, and again three days post-operatively as an emergency with profuse vomiting and abdominal pain. She underwent diagnostic laparoscopy, and a small gastric perforation was found at the site of the fundoplication and this was suture-repaired. On both admissions, she was “screened” for pregnancy as per current guidelines. On the second admission, following a CT scan, she was found to have a gravid uterus with a foetus of 16–18 weeks’ gestation. In the opinion of the authors, this case highlights that current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines may be insufficient and could lead to unnecessary harm either to mother or foetus pre-, peri- or post-operatively.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)60-62
    Number of pages3
    JournalScottish Medical Journal
    Volume63
    Issue number2
    Early online date7 Mar 2018
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2018

    Keywords

    • Pregnancy test
    • preoperative procedures
    • Humans
    • Risk Factors
    • Abdominal Pain
    • Laparoscopy
    • Preoperative Care
    • Polycystic Ovary Syndrome/surgery
    • Pregnancy
    • Pregnancy Tests/statistics & numerical data
    • Fundoplication
    • Pregnancy, Unplanned
    • Adult
    • Female
    • Pregnancy Outcome

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Current standards for assessing pregnancy status before surgery are subjective and should be replaced with definitive, objective evidence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this