If condition optimization

Binja shows the following:
(example taken from SmsRouterSvc.dll at 0x18002994c - CSmsMessageXmlHelper::GetBroadcastMessageXml)

long result_1 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::GetXmlDocument(nullptr, &var_1b8)
long result = result_1
struct IXMLDOMDocument* rdi = var_1b8

if (result_1 s>= 0) {
    long result_2 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(rdi, u"Message", nullptr, &var_1a8)
    result = result_2
    rbx = var_1a8
    
    if (result_2 s>= 0) {
        long result_3 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(rbx, u"MessageType", u"Broadcast", nullptr)
        result = result_3
        
        if (result_3 s>= 0) {
            long result_4 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(rbx, u"SmsDeviceId", r14, nullptr)
            result = result_4
            
            if (result_4 s>= 0) {
                long result_5 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(rbx, u"SimIccId", arg5, nullptr)
                result = result_5
                
                if (result_5 s>= 0) {
                    uint16_t* bstrString = nullptr
                    long result_12 = (*(*var_1e0 + 0x30))()
                    result = result_12
                    
                    if (result_12 s>= 0) {
                        long result_6 = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(rbx, u"Text", bstrString, nullptr)
                        result = result_6

 /* if conditions go much further, this is just a sample */

(As a side note, because of the conditions it feels like new result_* are created each time, which just makes it harder to read)
When it could be optimized into something like:

long result = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::GetXmlDocument(nullptr, xmlDoc);
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

IXMLDOMElement* messageElement = nullptr;
result = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(*xmlDoc, L"Message", nullptr, &messageElement);
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

result = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(messageElement, L"MessageType", L"Broadcast", nullptr);
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

result = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(messageElement, L"SmsDeviceId", smsDeviceId, nullptr);
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

result = Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::AddElement(messageElement, L"SimIccId", simIccId, nullptr);
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

BSTR bstrString = nullptr;
result = GetMessageText(&bstrString); 
if (result < 0) {
    return result;
}

More examples from the same binary (SmsRouterSvc.dll):
0x18000fd10 - Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::GetXmlDocument
0x1800286ec - CSmsMessageXmlHelper::GetStatusMessageXml
0x180048484 - GetDeliverMessageXml (specifically around 0x1800488bd)
(^ most references to Windows::Sms::Common::CSmsUtil::GetXmlDocument seems to have the same pattern, and so if conditions)

As #3527 was closed a bit ago, I am opening this one. Below is the dll.
SmsRouterSvc.dll.zip
This was tested on 4.2.6298-dev

Start with the supplied SmsRouterSvc.dll examples, especially CSmsUtil::GetXmlDocument, GetStatusMessageXml, and GetDeliverMessageXml, and compare their generated pseudocode around the cited addresses. Determine whether the decompiler can reuse the result variable and represent the nested checks as early returns; done means equivalent output for these patterns without the repeated result_* variables.