AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Alev Atis Aydin, Obstetrician & Gynecologist University of Health Sciences, Istanbul Sarıyer Hamidiye Etfal Training & Research Hospital, Sarıyer, Istanbul/TURKEY.
Citation: Alev A. Aydin., Kamuran Sanli, Zuhat Acar, Sema S. Caypınar., Deniz Acar, et all (2022). Amniopatch Treatment in Spontaneous Previable Preterm Rupture of Membranes with Neonatal Outcomes. J. Women Health Care and Issues. 5(2); DOI:10.31579/2642-9756/108
Copyright: © 2022 Alev Atis Aydin, 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: 01 February 2022 | Accepted: 14 February 2022 | Published: 18 February 2022
Keywords: previable; premature rupture of membranes; amniopatch; neonatal
Objective: To evaluate the efficiency of amniopatch application in previable preterm rupture of membranes (pPPROM) between 17-23 gestational weeks of pregnancy.
Methods: 30 pregnants with previable preterm rupture of membranes were given amniopatch as therapy option instead of termination.After one week of antibiotics and bed rest the volunteers were applied amniopatch under sonographic guidance by infusion of 100 mL of 0.9% Isotonic solution alternate infusions of platelets, normal saline and FFP with a total of 100cc of each maximally were given into amniotic cavity. During infusion, in the event of bradycardia, the infusion was stopped.
Results: 38 amniopatches were applied to 30 pPPROM patients. 7 aborted, 17 gave an immature birth and 6 gave preterm birth None reached to term. Alive birth rate was %23, All of them were born prematurely with changing durations in Neonatal Intensive Care Unite (NICU). In the 7 alive newborns duration of NICU differed (10 days-91 days) with a mean of 44,5 days. Deepest vertical pocket normalized in only 4 of the 30 patients (13,3%) after one week. There were 2 ablatio plasenta cases, none born alive. Cesarean section rate was 6/30 (%20). Maternal complications were endometritis (5/30, 16%), chorioamnionitis 4/30 (13%) all cured with antbiotic regimens in one week, none had sepsis.
Conclusion: Results of amniopatch treatment in pPPROM are not convincing, although you restore the amnion a little bit, the etiopathogenesis and underlying factors still exist and cause premature birth, resulting in neonatal complications.
Premature (prelabor) rupture of membranes (PROM) is a rupture of the membranes before labor begins. If PROM occurs before 37 weeks of pregnancy, it is called preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). PROM occurs in about 8 to 10 percent of all pregnancies. PPROM (before 37 weeks) accounts for one fourth to one third of all preterm births and is one of the major causes of preterm births [1] . However, the prognosis of PPROM before 24 weeks of gestation, is not favorable and is called previable PPROM (pPPROM) complicates about 1-4 /1000 pregnancies [2,3]. Neonatal outcomes and prognosis are not promising due to pulmonary hypoplasia, extremity defects like Potter syndrome and various complications [1,4]. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal management for pPPROM. At this early gestational age they may be counseled about the potential risks and benefits of expectant management or the termination, with antibiotic therapy, steroid administration and/or tocolytic therapy [2,6]. Previable PPROM at this early stage of pregnancy occurs either iatrogenically (iPPROM) or spontaneously (sPPROM) [3,5]. Previable iPPROM may occur after chorionic villus sampling, amniocentesis or therapeutic procedures like shunt therapies [4,6]. Regardless of the type or etiology, the prognosis of pPPROM is not good.
The etiology of previable sPPROM is not identified but intrauterine infection is known to be the most common identifiable cause [5-8]. Even with the recent advances in obstetric and neonatal care, the survival rate of neonates born at less than 22–24 weeks of gestation ranges between 40–60% at best. Transabdominal amnioinfusion may be beneficial for preventing pulmonary hypoplasia and prolonging the latency period [9]. However, this treatment can not possibly seal the defect completely. Many experimental and clinical studies have been conducted in order to seal the defected membranes, including isotonic solutions, maternal blood, fibrinogen extract and evaluation of the amniopatch technique [9-12]. The amniopatch technique was first introduced by Quintero et al. [10] in 1996. It consisted of infusing a platelet concentrate and cryoprecipitate into the amniotic cavity which may form a blood plug and seal the defected site, as a result of platelet activation and fibrin formation [10,11]. The success rate of the amniopatch treatment varies from 10 to 60
This is a cohort study of women diagnosed with prevable sPPROM at 16–24 weeks of gestation between September 2017 and January 2019 at our Training & Research Hospital’s Perinatology Clinic, a tertiary-care referral hospital in Istanbul. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board by the number of 2017-06-31.
The diagnosis of ruptured membranes was made by the presence of gross leakage and pooling of amniotic fluid in the vagina with positive nitrazine test or placental α microglobulin-1 test (amniosure). Gestational age was calculated based on CRL measurement made during the first trimester. Patients were placed for at least 2 -5 days of bed rest, in trial with expectation of spontaneous sealing of the membranes. During this waiting period, prophylactic antibiotic treatment, with iv cefazolin (1 g every 6 h) and oral azitromisin (500 mg 1x2) administration, and the daily amniotic fluid volume and fetal heart beat control was performed. If the amniotic fluid leakage persisted and the amniotic fluid volume continuously decreased, we counseled the patient about the potential benefits and risks and offered the following options: 1) active treatment with an effort to seal the ruptured membranes using the amniopatch technique; 2) expectant management with prophylactic antibiotics, antenatal corticosteroids and/or tocolytics; or 3) termination of pregnancy (TOP).
The amniopatch procedure was not offered as a treatment option to patients with regular uterine contractions or vaginal bleeding, cervical insufficiency, major fetal congenital anomalies, or signs or symptoms of clinical chorioamnionitis.
Clinical characteristics of patients before performing an amniopatch included age, parity, gestational age at PPROM. Factors associated with the procedures included gestational age at amniopatch, PPROM-to-delivery interval, maximal vertical pocket (MVP) before and after the procedure. MVP was used because the 4 quadrant assessment was not feasible in severe oligohydramnios.
Pregnancy outcomes included termination of pregnancy (TOP), fetal death, stillbirth, live birth, gestational age at delivery, delivery beyond 34 weeks of gestation, delivery beyond 37 weeks of gestation, PPROM-to-delivery interval, amniopatch-to-delivery interval, and clinical chorioamnionitis. TOP was done when pregnant woman refused to maintain the pregnancy. Fetal death was defined as no fetal heart beat while fetus is in the uterus.
Whereas stillbirth included all death of fetus including, death occurring with or immediately after birth. Clinical chorioamnionitis was defined as maternal fever of 37.8 °C or more plus one or more of the following signs: uterine tenderness, malodorous vaginal discharge, maternal serum WBC count of more than 15,000 cells/mm3 maternal tachycardia (>100 beats/min) and fetal tachycardia (>160 beats/min).
Neonatal outcomes of live-born neonates were birth weight, need of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and neonatal mortality.
We obtained written informed consent from each patient who chose the amniopatch treatment. Briefly, blood products were prepared using the transfusion protocol, and an ultrasound-guided amnioinfusion of the platelet concentrate followed by cryoprecipitate was performed Blood bank prepared the products of one unit of cross matched fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and one unit of platelets concentrate. After they came to room temperature, first amnioinfusion was performed using a 20- 22 gauge spinal needle after sterilization of the abdomen with povidone iodine. Prior to the procedure we excluded a subclinical infection by measurement of the C-reactive protein, procalcitonin and a white blood cell count. We usually gave a local anaesthetic and used a 22 G needle to access a safe location, devoid of umbilical cord. An infusion of 100 mL of 0.9% Isotonic solution was given to create a safe and clear pocket, which also permited better visualisation of the further procedure. Then alternate infusions of 20 mL of platelets, normal saline (which does not contain Calcium, needed for the clotting process), and 20 mL of FFP were given in order to avoide contact between the blood products and clotting in the lines. During infusion, the fetal heart rate as well as the accumulation of amniotic fluid were monitored by ultrasound. In the event of bradycardia, the platelet infusion was stopped and additional saline was used to dilute the active substances. Usually a total of around 100 mL of platelets, 100 mL of FFP and 150 mL of amnioinfusion fluid was used, because of slow infusion, the procedure could easily take up to 20 min. We usually offered one, maximally two attempts, if the initial ones did not cure amniotic fluid leakage. 8 patients had twice amnioinfusion, the others were applied only once.
On the following days, bed rest, prophylactic antibiotic therapy, and daily ultrasound monitoring for amniotic fluid volume were continued. Tocolytics and antenatal corticosteroid were administered when indicated. Primary outcome was no further additional amniotic fluid leakage and maintenance/increase of amniotic fluid volume after the treatment. Failure of amniopatch treatment was defined as continuous amniotic fluid leakage after the procedure and/or persistent oligohydramnios.
The proportions were compared using the x2 test or Fisher’s exact test as appropriate. The results were considered statistically significant when p values were <0>
38 amniopatches were applied to 30 previable PPROM patients. 7 aborted, 17 gave an immature birth and 6 gave preterm birth (Figure 1). Demographic variables are shown in Table 1.
Alive birthrate was #, 2 patients out of 30 had ablatio plasenta (6,6%), 4 had chorioamnionitis cured totally with two antibiotics regimen, 5 had postpartum endometritis none were severe and were cured & discharged after 7 days of antibiotic therapy. Deepest vertical pocket was normalized (> 2,5 cm) in only 4 of the 30 patients (13,3%) after one week ( table 2).
In the 7 alive newborns, duration of NICU differed (10 days-91 days) with a mean of 44,5 days. All had normal neurodevelopment at 2 years of age.
Neonatal survival rate was #, none reached to term, all of them were born prematurely with changing durations in NICU (Table 2). Except 2 nonsevere retinopathies, none of them had bad outcome or complications but longer duration in NICU was hesitating both for parents and doctors in charge . Nearly all the vaginal deliveries were sudden and unexpected, except in induction of stillbirths .Amniopatch success were higher in group done after 20weeks compared with before. There were 2 ablatio plasenta cases, unfortunately none born live (one was at 25weeks 890 gr, the other 1390gr at 30 weeks. Cesarean section (cs) rate was 6/30 ( ) not high for these risky patients, .IUGR rate was high 3/7 (42.8%). Babies having retinopathy were cured with operation
PPROM is defined as a rupture of the fetal membranes prior to 37 weeks of completed gestation. This significant obstetric problem is directly related to 40 -50 % of all preterm births [2,8]. Specifically, spontaneous pPPROM is a disease of the fetal membranes in which inflammation-oxidative stress axis produces pathways that can lead to membrane weakening through a variety of processes. While there are several therapeutic options to reverse the rupture, it is highly difficult to reverse these processes. Therefore many of these aforementioned options (bedrest, antibiotics, amnioinfusion or amniopatch, endoscopic repair of rupture site etc.) are relatively unsuccessful [5-10].
Amniopatch for the treatment of sPPROM is less efficacious than the iPPROM ruptures. The reason for this is unclear but contributing factors may include the various underlying etiologies, the higher risk for infection and antenatal bleeding. In the amniopatch procedure, platelets are infused into the amniotic cavity together with the necessary clotting factors. Quintero reported a success rate of amniopatch used for iPPROM ranging from 65-80 % in two successive studies [10,11]. In a much lower finding, Richter et al. reported an amniopatch success rate of 58 %, and an overall live birth rate of 68% [18].Further evidence of the wide variation in success rate, Deprest reported that the procedure was successful in approximately 66 % of the iatrogenic ruptures included in the study. In 2017, Chmait et al evaluated the success rate of amniopatch in women with iPPROM, finding that PPROM occurred in 19 out of 1124 women who underwent laser surgery for TTTS. They reported a success rate of amniopatch in 63.2% of the women [17].
The membrane defects in iPPROM are usually well demarcated and relatively small, and the needles used are usually inserted high in the uterine cavity under sterile conditions.
In contrast, membrane defects in sPPROM are mostly large, poorly delineated, over or near the internal cervical os, and commonly associated with intra-amniotic infections [12]. Concomitant intra-amniotic infections may also cause an amniopatch procedure to fail, as bacterial fibrinolytic enzymes will cause rapid clot degradation, coexisting leukocytes may be activated and inflammatory reactions can then occur [18] . For these reasons, previous studies have found that the amniopatch procedure in sPPROM is far less effective . We reviewed the available literature to find cases of sPPROM treated with amniopatch but the treatment was only successful in a few cases [11, 15, 19]. Kwak et al. reported in his study that amniopatch treatment in spontaneous ruptures was successful in 1 out of 7 cases (14.3%). All except one were born prematurely and one had a mild disability. Other studies reported lower rates of complet healing of membranes with spontaneous rupture (11-14.3 %) [19-21].
Contino et al. and Ferianec both reported two successful cases delivered at 27 weeks [12] and 33 weeks of gestation [15], respectively. The periods of prolongation of the pregnancies were 4 weeks and 12 weeks, respectively.
Finally, Young reported successful treatment in none of the sPPROM cases but successful treatment in 3 out of 4 iPPROM cases [13].
In 2017, Sung et al performed a cohort study in to assess the risk factors of amniopatch in 28 women with iatrogenic or spontaneous PPROM between 15- 23 weeks of gestation. They reported successful procedures in 6 out of 28 women (21.4%) with iPPROM and only 2 out of 17 (11.8%) in women with sPPROM [20].
Maged et al. reported achieving complete sealing of membranes via amniopatch in 6 out of 50 (12%) women with sPPROM and restoration of the amion fluid index to the normal range in 22 out of 50 (44%) women. However the neonatal outcomes did not differ between the two groups [14,15].
Maged et al. also reported that their neonatal outcomes between the amniopatch group and expectant management group did not differ. There were no significant differences between the gestational ages at delivery, Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes, NICU admission and duration of stay, perinatal mortality and neonatal complications in the two study groups. Futher, there was no statistical difference between women who underwent amniopatch and the control group regarding the mode of delivery, length of hospital stay or development of maternal complications. Our study confirmed that the neonatal outcomes of amniopatch are not favorable. This begs the question if the neonatal outcomes do not differ why perform amniopatch ?
We attempted to seal the ruptured membranes with an amniopatch technique in sPPROM patients, which was the largest study on amniopatch up till to now. We hypothesized that the degree of defects would be variable among previable sPPROM patients, and that few patients that would benefit from the amniopatch procedure. In this study, we reviewed 38 amniopatch procedures performed on 30 women with previable sPPROM at 17–23 weeks’ of gestation and compared the pregnancy outcomes of these cases with the controls who continued their pregnancies with conservative management. We found a neonatal survival rate of 23.3 % (7 out of 30 women) but 2 patients were at 24-25 weeks when their patches were applied. Thus our actual neonatal survival rate was lower at 16.6%. Among the survivors NICU admission rate was high,with a duration stay ranging (from 10-91days) (mean: 44,5 days) . None of the patients reached full term, with gestational weeks ranging from 26-36 (mean: 30,2 weeks) at birth. Two amniopatches were applied at 24 weeks, this may have affected their survival chance due to earlier pulmoner maturation. Mean fetal weights at birth was 1235gr (890-2065gr); 3 out of 7 were IUGR babies (42.8%). The deepest vertical pocket (> 2,5 cm) was normalized in 4 of 30 patients (13.3%). Further seven infants were born alive, which is consistent with the above studies. This means that although we restored the amniotic fluid in some cases, we could not build the same environment,- the same vascular network - in utero. The rate of NICU stay was high. In the 7 alive newborns duration of NICU differed (10 days-91 days) with a mean of 44,5 days. All had normal neurodevelopment at 2 years of age. But follow up of these newborns were challenging if they will be spastic or disabled because of prematurity. Two out of 7 had premature retinopathy fully recovered after operation fortunately. Although informed consent was taken for the possible complications & outcomes, families have hesitating moods when a complication occured as most premature babies had intracranial bleeding more or less due to prematurity but parents met these with a great grief .Thanks god they were all cured without a sequela. If they had sequela we would face with malpractis charges even though the parents had given informed consent previously. This is the largest study including 38 amniopatches on 30 patients, I could say instead of letting the fetuses to natural selection after PPROM, with amnipatch ,we drag them into prematurity complications or into a life with disabilities. Amniopatch just restores amnion may be temporarily but not the whole pathopysiology. According to above studies, although amniopatch helped in some cases, the fact is not normalisation of amnion quantitively actually. At the end most delivered preterm and were subjected to neonatal complications. Fortunately maternal complications were not severe, 4 chorioamnionitis cases responded to antibiotics .We also had not sepsis or life threatening complications just as the studies reported no increased risk for maternal complications,
Because of all these factors, amniopatch should not be recommended in spontaneous previable preterm premature rupture of membranes but should be reserved for iatrogenic cases.
Limitations of this study is that we could compare amniopatch group with expectant group in previable PPROM cases, but it is obvious that the results are not promising in both groups in observational studies.Further studies would approve our results.
Amniopatch treatment in pPPROM may help in minority of cases but it never heals the underlying factors that cause preterm birth.
We thank to perinatology staff including fellows, nurses, personels, blood bank staff, assistants and all residents on shifts.
None
None
None
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.
