Cervical cancer remains one of the main causes of female mortality, especially in middle- and low-income countries, despite efforts towards the implementation of global vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV). The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published international guidelines providing recommendations on cervical cancer screening strategies among average and high-risk women. Thus, a comparative review of guidelines by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the American Cancer Society (ACS), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC), the Cancer Council Australia (CCA), and the European Guidelines (EG) was conducted. There is an overall agreement regarding the suggestions made for women younger than 21 and those older than 65, with all guidelines stating against routine screening, with the exceptions of CTFPHC and CCA that expand the age group to up to 70 and 75 years, respectively. Continuation of screening in older women is also suggested in those with a history of a precancerous lesion and those with inadequate screening. Most guidelines recommend routine screening at 30–65 years, while the WHO advises that screening should be prioritized at 30–49 years. HPV DNA testing is the method of choice recommended by most guidelines, followed by cytology as an alternative, except for CTFPHC, which refers to cytology only, with self-sampling being an acceptable method by most medical societies. Agreements exist regarding recommendations for specific groups, such as women with a history of total hysterectomy for benign reasons, women with a complete vaccination against HPV, individuals from the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer communities and women with multiple sexual partners or early initiation of sexual activity. On the other hand, the age group of 21–29 is addressed differently by the reviewed guidelines, while differentiations also occur in the screening strategies in cases of abnormal screening results, in women with immunodeficiency, those with in utero exposure to diethylstilbestrole and pregnant women. The development of consistent practice protocols for the most appropriate cervical cancer screening programs seems to be of major importance to reduce mortality rates and safely guide everyday clinical practice.

Endometrial hyperplasia, presenting without atypia (EH) or as atypical hyperplasia (AH), is considered a precursor of endometrial cancer and affects women of reproductive or perimenopausal age, posing a major public health concern. The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published influential guidelines providing recommendations on the management of endometrial hyperplasia. Thus, a comparative review of guidelines from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists was conducted. There is a consensus regarding the optimal management strategies for EH, with observation and medical treatment being the first-line options and surgical treatment with total hysterectomy offering a second line in specific cases. Moreover, there is agreement regarding patients with AH, with surgical treatment being the recommended approach, while medical therapy is preferred for women who seek fertility preservation. Notably, close surveillance with endometrial biopsies every 3 or 6 months is suggested unanimously, as well as long-term follow-up in high-risk patients. Controversy exists regarding the initial diagnostic approach, with RCOG and SOGC suggesting outpatient endometrial biopsy, while ACOG recommends diagnostic hysteroscopy, as well as the therapeutic regimens for the oral treatment of EH. Surgical techniques such as endometrial ablation, intraoperative frozen section analysis, intraoperative visual inspection of the uterus, and morcellation constitute areas of controversy among the reviewed guidelines, and the surveillance protocols for women with EH are addressed differently between RCOG and SOGC. Notably, RCOG is the only medical society offering recommendations regarding women under HRT and those on therapy for breast cancer. The development of consistent international practice protocols for timely management strategies and surveillance protocols is of paramount importance to safely guide clinical practice and subsequently improve women’s health.

First-trimester sonographic examination remains a fundamental part of antenatal care, providing crucial information for the well-being of both the mother and fetus and leading to the best possible perinatal outcomes. This study aimed to review and compare the most recently published guidelines on first-trimester ultrasound. Therefore, a descriptive review of guidelines from the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), the Australasian Society of Ultrasound in Medicine (ASUM), the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the Society of Obstetrician and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC) and the World Association of Perinatal Medicine (WAPM) regarding first-trimester scans was conducted. There is a consensus regarding the main parameters that should be evaluated, the qualifications of the examiner and specifications of the ultrasound machine, as well as the importance of informed consent. Additionally, the importance of careful visualization of fetal anatomy is discussed, with minor discrepancies regarding the appropriate protocol used. The use of combined first-trimester examination is encouraged by all the reviewed medical societies, although cell-free DNA testing is addressed only by a few, with similar indications. Controversy exists regarding the indications and appropriate gestational age at which the first-trimester scan should be performed, as well as the proper establishment of pregnancy dating. Notably, recommendations regarding fetal growth restriction (FGR) and diagnostic invasive procedures are made only by few medical societies, with the AWMF and SOGC addressing screening for FGR. Furthermore, invasive diagnostic testing is discussed by the AIUM, AWMF and SOGC, with differentiations among them regarding the indications for pursuing such procedures. First-trimester sonographic examination is essential for assessing fetal viability, establishing accurate pregnancy dating, evaluating fetal and maternal anatomy and calculating the risk of various fetal and maternal conditions. The implementation of evidence-based, unified protocols would advance both maternal and fetal outcomes.