Blog
About

62
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0
shares
  • Review: found
Is Open Access

Review of 'Twin pregnancy in each half of a didelphys uterus with delayed delivery and review of literature'

Bookmark
2
interesting, but need revision
Average rating:
    Rated 2.5 of 5.
Level of importance:
    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of validity:
    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of completeness:
    Rated 2 of 5.
Level of comprehensibility:
    Rated 1 of 5.
Competing interests:
None

Reviewed article

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Twin pregnancy in each half of a didelphys uterus with delayed delivery and review of literature

Abstract Didelphys uterus results from an incomplete fusion of mullerian ducts and corresponds to the class III of mullerian abnormalities of the American Fertility Society. We describe the case of a spontaneous twin pregnancy developed in each cavity of a didelphys uterus. At 29 weeks of gestation and 6 days, the patient had preterm rupture of membranes in the right horn. She went into spontaneous labor and delivered vaginally the first “right” twin. Delivery was complicated with post-partum hemorrhage on uterine atonia treated with a Bakri balloon. She was tocolyzed to pursue the fetal lung maturity of the second twin. She had a rupture of the second membranes at 30 weeks and 3 days and had a preterm vaginal delivery at 32 weeks and 1 day of the second twin. Twin pregnancy in both horns of a uterus is extremely rare, about 1 in 1,000,000. Pregnancies on congenital abnormalities of the paramesonephric duct present frequently poor obstetrical outcomes and many complications. There are no guidelines about the follow-up of these high-risk patients or the mode of delivery.
    Bookmark

    Review information

    10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-MED.ASNJHF.v1.RHIUIM

    This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com.

    ScienceOpen disciplines:
    Keywords:

    Review text

    This article deals with an interesting topic, although it does not provide important insights in the argument, It can be useful as shared experience on a quite rare clinical situation. Unfortunately, in the introduction and in the case report, the authors write in an incorrect English with frequent errors in grammar and sentence construction. Improper use of words/literary translation instead of correct medical terms/grammar ( eg. boy, to do, use of saxon genitive.. ) are frequent.



    After the authors will provide corrections with a native English speaker,s help, the paper will be certainly more fluent and comprehensible.

    Comments

    Comment on this review