the oldest and largest teaching hospital of the state. She is a Master Trainer of Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC). She has participated as invited Guest Faculty in various international and National conferences. She has the innovation of C. G Balloon Uterine Tamponade to her credit. She has 38 Publications in various Journals and books of International & National repute. She was Editor-in-Chief, Souvenir North zone Yuva FOGSI 2011 and Co-Editor of two books including A Handbook of Obstetric emergencies and A Monogram on HRT. She has innovated C.G. Balloon for better management of postpartum haemorrhage.

Background: Cervical cancer ranks as the second most common cancer among women in India. Incidence is 6-29% approximately of all cancer in India. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value and Accuracy of VIA and Pap smear. Method: This was a comparative study done between May 2019 to April 2020. Patients screened from the Gynaecological OPD from the department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, GMC Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. Firstly Pap smear was taken followed by VIA was performed with 3-5% acetic acid. Pap smear positive patients are called back for biopsy. Results: In this study total 200 patients have participated, VIA positive in 35 patients(17.5%) and Pap smear positive in 17 patients(3.5%).Out of 17 patients, five were positive for carcinoma cervix(2.5%), seven cases of ASCUS(3.5%), two cases of LSIL(1%), three cases of HSIL(1.5%), patients with NILM were 98(49%). Conclusion:This study shown that VIA is more sensitive than Pap smear. VIA is easy, low cost and treatment can be administered in the same sitting. By this study we recommended that VIA can be used to screen for cervical cancer in rural areas where Pap smear is difficult and expensive.

Background: The objective of this present study was to assess the efficacy of condom uterine balloon tamponade (C-UBT) in averting the obstetric hysterectomy (OH) in cases of major postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) over a period of 10 years.Methods: A retrospective cohort study from January 2010 to December 2019. A historical cohort was drawn from a group of women who had OH for major PPH between Jan 2010 to December 2014 (Group 1) whereas those from January 2015 to December 2019 were designated as Group 2. Total 305 C-UBT were used in the later period. Women who had OH at <28 weeks were excluded from the study. Primary outcome was to determine the efficacy of C-UBT in averting the risk of OH. Secondary objective was to determine the success rate of C-UBT after five years of useResults: Total 37463 births occurred from January 2010 to December 2014 and 38808 during January 2015 to December 2019. Cases of OH were 33 in the first five years period (Group 1) and 20 in the later (Group 2), p=<05, odds ratio=0.58 with 95% CI 0.335-1.019 favoring C-UBT.  After exclusion of rupture uterus and placenta accreta syndrome, OH for uterine atony alone were 22 (66.6%) for Group 1 and 08 (40%) for Group 2, P=0.01 odds ratio=0.350 (95% CI 0.156-0.788). No OH was done in group 2 for placenta previa. Efficacy of C-UBT was 96%.Conclusions: C-UBT is very safe, cheap and effective option for averting OH and associated physical, emotional and psychosocial morbidity.

No abstract