AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2642-9756/164
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
* Karlijn De Vocht and Kobe Dewilde contributed equally to the manuscript
*Corresponding Author: Karlijn De Vocht, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology University Hospital Leuven Herestraat 49 Leuven, 3000, Belgium.
Citation: S Karlijn De Vochta, Kobe Dewildea, Anne Pexstersa, Thierry Van den Boscha (2023), The Role of First Trimester Ultrasound in the Detection of Vasa Previa: a Systematic Review, J. Women Health Care and Issues. 6(5); DOI:10.31579/2642-9756/164
Copyright: © 2023, Karlijn De Vocht. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 07 August 2023 | Accepted: 18 August 2023 | Published: 25 August 2023
Keywords: vasa previa; screening; first trimester; ultrasonography
Vasa previa is a rare disorder in which fetal blood vessels are left unprotected in the membranes and cross the internal os of the cervix. The risk of vessel tearing causing antepartum bleeding and fetal death due to exsanguination is highly increased. Prenatal detection drastically improves fetal outcome. The aim of this study is to scrutinize the recent evidence for the use of first trimester prenatal ultrasonography to improve the detection of vasa previa. We conducted a systematic literature review in the computerized databases Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science from inception to September 2022. Two first trimester sonographic markers are associated with vasa previa later in pregnancy: umbilical cord insertion in the lower one-third of the uterine cavity and a velamentous insertion. We conclude the evaluation of the umbilical cord insertion in the first trimester is feasible, not time-consuming and may identify the population at increased risk for vasa previa.
VP: vasa previa
RF: risk factor
ART: assisted reproductive technology
SR: systematic review
PPV: positive predictive value
Vasa previa is a rare and potentially lethal obstetrical complication occurring in approximately in 0.46/1000 pregnancies (Degirmenci, Steetskamp, Macchiella, Hasenburg, & Hasenburg, 2022; Nohuz, Boulay, Gallot, Lemery, & Vendittelli, 2017; Pavalagantharajah, Villani, & D'Souza, 2020). The first type of vasa previa is associated with a velamentous cord insertion, the second type with bilobate or succenturiate placenta and the third type includes unprotected vessels along the margin of the placenta (Bohîlțea et al., 2022) If undiagnosed the fetal morbidity and mortality, caused by fetal vessel damage, is extremely high. The survival rate in undetected cases is 72.1%, versus 98.6% in prenatally detected cases, making pre-natal detection of paramount importance (Zhang et al., 2021). Prenatal detection also drastically decreases postnatal transfusion and hypoxic morbidity (Degirmenci et al., 2022; Ochiai et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021).
Known risk factors for vasa previa include assisted reproductive technology (ART), a low-lying placenta in second trimester, placenta previa, bilobate- or succenturiate placenta, velamentous cord insertion and multiple gestations (Degirmenci et al., 2022).
Screening for vasa previa is not universally recommended in national or international guidelines. First or second semester screening guidelines of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics (ISUOG) or American College of Obstetricians (ACOG) mention visualization of placental umbilical cord insertion (Bilardo et al., 2023; Pinar et al., 2014; Salomon et al., 2022) as optional while the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) and the Australian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine (ASUM) do include the assessment of placental cord insertion as standard practice in the second trimester scan protocol ("AIUM-ACR-ACOG-SMFM-SRU Practice Parameter for the Performance of Standard Diagnostic Obstetric Ultrasound Examinations," 2018; Bethune, Alibrahim, Davies, & Yong, 2013). On the one hand, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) reports in its guideline of 2018 that there is insufficient evidence to support universal screening for vasa previa at the second trimester scan (Jauniaux et al., 2019). On the other hand, the Society of Obstetricans and Gynaecologist of Canada (SOGC) and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) recommend targeted screening in case of low-lying placenta (Gagnon, 2017; Javid, Hyett, Walker, Sullivan, & Homer, 2019).
From the 2nd trimester onwards, the accuracy of vasa previa detection by transvaginal ultrasound is high with a 100% sensitivity and a 99% specificity according to two prospective studies (Ruiter et al., 2015). In retrospective studies the overall median detection rate was 93% (Ruiter et al., 2015). In case of second trimester diagnosis, spontaneous resolution of vasa previa towards the third trimester is seen in 8.6-39% (Degirmenci et al., 2022; Erfani et al., 2019; Klahr et al., 2019; Oyelese et al., 2004). Therefore, follow-up in the third trimester is recommended.
Prenatal diagnosis is key to prevent neonatal morbidity and mortality caused by vasa previa, yet there is no consensus on routine prenatal screening. Given that vasa previa is rare, an early phase, non-invasive and easy screening could help to identify a high-risk population. This systematic review (SR) is to make a broad search to find all reports about vasa previa and first trimester screening using ultrasound and hereby evaluate the possibility of an early risk stratification.
1.Search strategy
A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
By the support of a medical librarian, a comprehensive search string of Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science the core collection was designed by KDV and TVDB. The search included reports from inception until September 2022. There were no language restrictions. The search strategy consisted of subject headings (MeSH, SH) and words in title and abstract for vasa previa or related conditions (‘vasa previa, ‘velamentous cord insertion’, ‘marginal placental cord insertion’) AND ultrasound or risk factor synonyms. (Supplementary Data 1).
This search was adapted to fit the search system of the three other databases. Duplicates were removed. The reference lists of the reviews and systematic reviews were screened for additional reports.
2. Study selection
For the screening process, Rayyan was used. Two researchers (KDV and KDW) independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. After the full-text screening, conducted by the same two independent researchers, unresolved discrepancies were decided with the senior researcher (TVDB).
Inclusion criteria are full text journal publications on first trimester ultrasonography and risk of vasa previa. Exclusion criteria are absent relation with the first trimester (i.e., up until 14 weeks gestational age), absent relation with vasa previa, review without a new case nor study material, systematic review, conference abstracts, letters to the editors or a commentary.
3.Data extraction
The number of vasa previa cases, the total number of the population and the prevalence of the identified risk factor or sonographic feature were retrieved by one reviewer (KDV).
4.Quality Assessment: assessment of risk of bias
The QUIPS checklist for the systematic assessment of the methodological quality is used to score the included cohort studies. Two reviewers scored the studies independently.
1.Study selection
The search resulted in 2337 records of which 1368 duplicates were removed. The title and abstract of 969 reports were screened, of which 286 were included for full-text screening.
The full text was not available online for 44 records, mainly manuscripts from before 1995.
The full texts of 242 reports were screened. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 9 papers were selected including five cohort studies and four case studies. One retrospective cohort and four prospective cohort studies were identified in this search. No additional reports were extracted from the reference list of the reviews and systematic reviews.
Figure 1: Study selection
2.Quality assessment
The consensus of the quality assessment of the included cohort studies was framed in table 1. Our risk of bias due to missing reports or studies is low because of the initial broad search strategy.
The included cohort studies scored low or moderate for risk of bias except the short report of Hasegawa et al. (2012) due to missing information and including a cohort overlapping with the two other included studies of Hasegawa et al. (2006, 2011).
Table 1: Risk of bias assessed by QUIPS quality assessment tool
3.1 Case reports
The search identified 4 case reports on vasa previa at delivery, reporting on first trimester sonographic findings as well.
At 8 weeks gestational age, the first case had a placenta lying over the internal ostium with a marginal insertion of the umbilical cord (Ochiai et al., 2021). The author of the second case described a low-lying placenta at 13 weeks without information about the cord insertion (Sauerbrei & Davies, 1998).
Both the third and fourth case report mentioned a cord insertion in the lower uterine segment at 11 and 12 weeks of gestation (Degirmenci et al., 2022; Hasegawa et al., 2007).
3.2 Cohort data synthesis (table 2)
Five cohort studies were included, published between 2006 and 2020. The cohort size varies between 318 and 26 830 patients. Three out of five cohort studies also included multiple gestations (Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2012; Hasegawa et al., 2011), which have a higher incidence of vasa previa. The cohort of Hasegawa et al. published in 2012 interferes with two previous cohorts by Hasegawa et al. published in 2006 and 2011. Therefore, the 2012 study was not deemed of additional value.
The two studied risk factors in the first trimester include a low cord insertion in the uterine cavity and a velamentous cord insertion.
Low cord insertion is defined by Hasegawa et al. (Derisbourg et al., 2021; Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2012; Hasegawa et al., 2011) as the insertion of the umbilical cord in the lower one-third of the uterine cavity. The incidence of low cord insertion was similar in all three prospective cohort studies: 11%, 10.6% and 11.9% respectively (Derisbourg et al., 2021; Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2011). Lower third cord insertion is not only associated with vasa previa, but also with low-lying placenta in second and third trimester and with velamentous and marginal cord insertion at birth (Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2011). The relative risk for vasa previa in case of a first trimester low cord insertion is 9.3 (Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2011).
Velamentous cord insertion at the inferior part of the placenta between 11-13 weeks gestation was described as risk factor for vasa previa by Zhang et al. (2020) and detected in 0.3% of the study population (Zhang et al., 2020).
From 9 weeks onwards a low cord insertion is detectable, whereas a velamentous cord insertion is detectable from 11-13 weeks gestational age onwards (Derisbourg et al., 2021; Hasegawa et al., 2006; Hasegawa et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2020). Before 11 weeks, the trophoblast covers most of the uterine cavity and umbilical cord insertion into the placenta may be difficult to determine. Therefore, Hasegawa et al. (2006) proposed to determine the position of the insertion of the cord in the uterine cavity instead of insertion in the placenta. After 11 weeks of gestational age Sepulveda et al. (2006) demonstrated the feasibility to determine a velamentous cord insertion (Sepulveda, 2006).
Except for Hasegawa et al. (2011) and Derisbourg et al. (2021) who reported on vasa previa in mid-trimester, the other cohorts documented the outcome at the time of delivery. Hasegawa et al. (2012) described no changes in diagnosis between 20 weeks and just prior to delivery (Hasegawa et al., 2012).
Zhang et al. (2020) followed vasa previa cases detected in the mid-trimester and only 1 in 22 cases resolved at 24 weeks (Zhang et al., 2020).
Hasegawa et al. (2011) tried to identify maternal risk factors for lower cord insertion in the first trimester. Multiparity, previous dilatation and curettage, multiple gestations, maternal age > 40y, smoking, alcohol drinking and in vitro fertilization were the examined possible risk factors but no associations were found (Hasegawa et al., 2011).
3.3 Incidence and detection rate (table 3)
The incidence of vasa previa in the included studies varies between 0.08 and 0.31%.
The incidence of vasa previa in the studies of Hasegawa (2006, 2011, 2012) and Derisbourg et al. (2021) was almost three times higher than in the series by Zhang et al. (2020).
A high sensitivity for vasa previa is noted with the sonographic assessment of the umbilical cord in the first trimester. Two out of three studies report 100% sensitivity for a low cord insertion in the first trimester as screening test for vasa previa, whereas one study reports a remarkably lower sensitivity of 25%.
A 76.2% sensitivity and even higher specificity for detecting vasa previa has been associated with velamentous cord insertion in the first trimester (Zhang et al., 2020). The positive predictive value for vasa previa is almost ten times higher for velamentous insertion than for a low cord insertion in the uterine cavity (Zhang et al., 2020).
Table 2: Summary of data extraction (VP: vasa previa, RF: risk factor)
Although vasa previa is a rare obstetrical condition, the associated high fetal morbidity and mortality, may justify an appropriated screening. We performed a meticulous and broad search to evaluate the current evidence for the use of first trimester sonography in vasa previa screening.
The studies included in our SR report a slightly higher incidence of vasa previa than other papers, reporting 0.02% and 0.22% incidence figures (3, 24). The latter lower incidence figures may be due to underreporting in retrospective series, in which some vasa previa cases may have been missed at cesarean section (Hasegawa et al., 2012). The study design of the included studies in our SR had a low risk for selection bias. The incidence reported in our SR may therefore be considered more reliable for the overall pregnant population.
Adequate and clinically relevant risk screening for vasa previa should be non-invasive, easy and performant with a high sensitivity and a reasonable specificity, meaning the test should not miss any vasa previa, while the number of the group stratified as high risk should be acceptable. First trimester screening provides the opportunity to identify a high-risk population for this rare entity. Most of the studies in this SR report a significant association between first trimester sonographic assessment of the umbilical cord insertion and vasa previa later in pregnancy, yet results are conflicting.
The first trimester sonographic assessment of the cord implantation in the uterine cavity may meet the condition of a suited risk stratification tool. According to our SR, one in ten pregnancies would be stratified as higher risk and referred for mid-trimester transvaginal ultrasound scan. In case of a lower cord insertion, vasa previa will eventually be diagnosed in 0.5-2.9% (table 3). The latter positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.5-2.9% for low cord insertion is remarkable lower than the PPV of 16% reported in the meta-analysis of Ruiter et al. (2016) (Ruiter et al., 2016). The explanation for this difference is found in the inclusion of the study of Hasegawa et al. (2010), which was not included in our SR. This study reports on low cord insertion in the mid-trimester instead of the first trimester, which results in a much higher PPV in the meta-analysis of Ruiter et al. (2016) (Hasegawa et al., 2010).
Furthermore, the undeniable difference in sensitivity between the studies of Hasegawa et al. (2006, 2011) and Derisbourg et al. (2021) must be clarified in the future.
The second sonographic risk factor in the first trimester is velamentous insertion, but only investigated as screening tool in one study. The two-step screening model from Zhang et al. (2020) is the first screening model which includes first trimester velamentous insertion and shows a higher detection rate than other second trimester risk factors. The latter author reporting sensitivity of 57% and 38% respectively for low-lying placenta and bilobed placenta in the second trimester as screening method for vasa previa, in contrast with a sensitivity of 76.2% with first trimester assessment (Zhang et al., 2020).
This method combined with appropriate monitoring and delivery would decrease overall stillbirths by 10%. They made this assumption by calculating the potential stillbirths in cases of non-detecting the vasa previa at all (Zhang et al., 2020).
Evaluation of the umbilical cord insertion in the first trimester is easy. Detection of the insertion of the umbilical cord becomes more difficult with progressing gestational age, viz 72
First trimester sonographic assessment of the umbilical cord insertion is feasible and may allow for stepwise risk stratification for vasa previa highlighting a high-risk population. If classified as high risk, focused follow-up with diagnostic transvaginal ultrasound with doppler evaluation in the second trimester would be indicated. Although the incidence is low, vasa previa is a life-threatening condition for the fetus. Therefore, we suggest validation of the evaluation of the placental umbilical cord insertion in the first trimester as risk stratification tool for vasa previa.
Acknowledgement
C. Van Meel, Information Specialist Research - Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven, Belgium
Statement of Ethics
An ethics statement is not applicable because this study is based exclusively on published literature.
Study approval statement: This study protocol did not need approval by the ethical committee by the University Hospital Leuven after submitting a questionnaire.
Consent to participate statement: Informed consent was not needed because of the use of published literature.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
The authors have no funding sources for this research.
Karlijn De Vocht: identification studies, writing original draft
Kobe Dewilde: conceptualization, identification studies, writing review and editing
Thierry Van den Bosch: conceptualization, writing review and editing
Anne Pexsters: writing review
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article and its supplementary material files. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
