-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: 17P From: AFuentes (afuentes@mindspring.com) Wed Dec 7 11:48:06 2005 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Andrew Folley: "Re: 17P- Controversy" Previous message: Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.: "Re: 17P" In reply to: Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.: "Re: 17P" Next in thread: R. Daniel Braun: "Re: 17P" In 1990, Keirse wrote a very good review in the BJ Obstet and Gynecol performing a meta-analysis of the 6 placebo contolled trials involving 17P and his group found a reduction in the incidence of PTD. Sanchez Ramos earlier this year also performed a meta-analysis showing a similar outcome... Armando Fuentes, MD Maternal Fetal Ctr Winter Park, FL -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D. Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 1:30 PM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: 17P Other than the fact that the exact study was performed in the early 60's with the opposite findings. In fact when the original paper was presented at the Society meeting, the original author actually commented on the paper by saying, "Nice study, I did the exact same thing in the 60's and found the opposite result"... Lynn Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D. Maternal-Fetal Medicine, OB/GYN Rocky Mountain Women's Health 2835 Fort Missoula Rd., Suite 304 Missoula, Montana, 59804 406-549-0978 fax 406-549-0987 e-mail: apgar10@montanadsl.net -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of AFuentes Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:54 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: 17P What is the controversy? I haven't come across any issues with the Meis study. Can you fill me in? Thanks Armando Fuentes, MD Maternal Fetal Ctr Winter Park, FL -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Andrew Folley Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 8:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: 17P Some controversy exists as to whether it works at all. Qustions regarding Meis original studyies. New research going on for use of 17 OH cream in vagina. andy >From: ainsron@sbcglobal.net (Dr. Ainsworth) >Reply-To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net >To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net> >Subject: 17P >Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 23:52:15 -0600 > >For those of you using or considering 17P for patients with Hx of >preterm labor, How would you use it in which of the following >circumstances?: > >1. 25 yo G3 P1102, history of first pregnancy at 40 wks, no >complications, no PTL; second pregnancy at 36 weeks, PROM, followed by >spontaneous labor. > >2. 25 yo G3 P1102, history of first pregnancy complicated by PTL from >30 weeks; delivery at 35 weeks, second pregnancy delivery at 39 weeks, >no PTL, not given 17P. > >3. 25 yo G3 P1102, history of term delivery at 39 weeks; second >pregnancy PTL from 30 weeks, delivery at 36 weeks. > >4. 25 yo G3 P2002, history of term delivery at 39 weeks; second >pregnancy PTL from 30 weeks, delivery at 39 weeks. > _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to -- _________________________________________________________________ get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement Next message: Andrew Folley: "Re: 17P- Controversy" Previous message: Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.: "Re: 17P" In reply to: Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.: "Re: 17P" Next in thread: R. Daniel Braun: "Re: 17P"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Jul 2 04:41:56 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.