Danielle D. Antosh

Utility of preoperative endometrial assessment in asymptomatic women undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic floor dysfunction.

Introduction and hypothesisUterine morcellation during laparoscopy for pelvic floor repair has prompted adoption of uterine screening tests by some surgeons. We report a case series of uterine malignancy incidentally diagnosed at the time of pelvic floor surgery.MethodsWe reviewed records from patients undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and/or urinary incontinence (UI) from January 2004 to December 2009 and abstracted preoperative screening trends and final pathologic diagnoses.ResultsOf the 708 women in the study, 125 (18%) had preoperative endometrial biopsy (EB), 43 (6%) had pelvic ultrasound (US), and 21 (3%) had EB and US. Surgical route included vaginal (58%), abdominal (23%), and laparoscopic (18%). Most (97.1%) final pathologic diagnoses were benign. Five cancers (0.6%) were detected; four of these women had normal preoperative screening, including EB (2), US (1), or both tests (1).ConclusionsScreening with EB + US was found to be ineffective in our cohort of patients due to the low prevalence of undetected uterine cancer in asymptomatic women planning POP/UI surgery.

Short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic sacral colpopexy.

Objective This study aimed to compare operative times and short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic sacral colpopexy. Methods A retrospective cohort study using a convenience sample was performed comparing patients who underwent robotic and laparoscopic sacral colpopexy during a 4-year period. Operative time, blood loss, perioperative complications, and objective cure of prolapse at 3 months were compared. Results Robotic procedures in 65 women and laparoscopic sacral colpopexy procedures in 23 women were performed. Median preoperative prolapse was stage 3 for both groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the median operative time between the robotic and laparoscopic groups, although this did not include robot setup time and did include concurrent procedures that differed significantly between groups (334 vs 325 minutes, P = 0.30). Estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic group (50 vs 100 mL, P = 0.003). Median hospital stay was 1 day in both groups (P = 0.23). There were no differences in overall objective cure rates between robotic and laparoscopic groups at 3 months of follow-up (87.1% vs 91.3%, P = 0.72). Perioperative complications, including visceral injury and mesh erosion, did not differ significantly between these groups. Conclusions Robotic and laparoscopic sacral colpopexy had similar operative times, short-term anatomic cure rates, perioperative complications, and length of hospital stay.

Risk factors for mesh extrusion after prolapse surgery: a case-control study.

Objectives To identify risk factors for mesh extrusion in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse repair by abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASC) or vaginal mesh procedure (VMP). Methods A multicenter case-control study of patients who underwent ASC or VMP from 2006 to 2009 identified using diagnosis and procedure coding. Cases were defined as women who underwent eligible index procedure with synthetic mesh and had mesh visible through the vaginal epithelium at postoperative evaluation; controls were matched in an approximate 1:3 ratio by date and type of procedure. Two conditional logistic regression models were constructed to assess variables associated with mesh extrusion among women who underwent ASC and among women who underwent VMP. Results Eighty-four cases were identified (43 cases after ASC and 41 cases after VMP), and 252 patients were matched as controls (147 patients who underwent ASC and 105 patients who underwent VMP). Concomitant hysterectomy was positively associated with mesh extrusion) among women who underwent ASC (adjusted odds ratio, 3.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.27–7.93; P = 0.01) and VMP (adjusted odds ratio, 3.72, 95% confidence interval, 1.20–11.54; P = 0.02). Age, race, type of vaginal incision, menopausal status, medical comorbidities, and smoking were not significantly associated with extrusion in either group. Conclusions Concomitant hysterectomy is a risk factor for mesh extrusion after ASC and VMPs. This information may be helpful during informed preoperative counseling and planning.

Diagnosis and management of female urethral diverticulum.

Female urethral diverticulum is a disorder that affects 1% to 6% of women. Women with diverticula may present with a variety of nonspecific genitourinary complaints, making the diagnosis challenging. Diagnosis is made by physical examination and can be confirmed with cystourethroscopy and/or radiographic imaging. Asymptomatic women can be managed conservatively, whereas treatment for symptomatic women usually involves a diverticulectomy. Potential complications from diverticulectomy include diverticulum recurrence, de novo stress incontinence, urethrovaginal fistula, urethral stricture, and recurrent urinary tract infections. This article reviews the etiology, differential diagnoses, evaluation, and management of female urethral diverticula.

Resident opinions on vaginal hysterectomy training.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to explore resident opinions about vaginal hysterectomy training and to evaluate future practice patterns and impediments to continuing vaginal hysterectomies after graduation. Methods: An anonymous survey was e-mailed to fourth-year gynecology residents before graduation. The survey assessed opinions on vaginal hysterectomy training and future practice plans. Results: One hundred eighty-three residents responded from 41 states. Most residents (75%) think vaginal hysterectomy training has been adequate to prepare them for future practice. Residents were more likely to respond that their training was adequate if they had performed more than 20 vaginal hysterectomies and if they had learned morcellation techniques. Only 42% of residents report vaginal route as their preferred route for hysterectomy. Conclusions: Most residents feel that training in vaginal hysterectomy has been adequate to prepare them for their future practice, although they are more likely to feel prepared if they have performed more than 20 vaginal hysterectomies.

Vaginal dilators for prevention of dyspareunia after prolapse surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of de novo dyspareunia in women with and without vaginal dilator use after posterior colporrhaphy. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included sexually active patients with prolapse and no bothersome baseline dyspareunia undergoing posterior colporrhaphy. Patients were randomized to daily vaginal dilator use from postoperative weeks 4 through 8 or to no dilator use. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination and vaginal caliber were measured at baseline, 8 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. Sexual function was evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire-12. Participants completed a Patient Global Impression of Improvement at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Sixty patients were randomized: 30 in the dilator group and 30 in the control group. There were no differences in baseline characteristics and postoperative vaginal caliber between groups. At 3 months, 9.5% of patients reported de novo dyspareunia in the dilator group compared with 19.2% of control patients (P=.44). At 6 months, 12.5% of patients in the dilator group reported de novo dyspareunia compared with 3.8% of control patients (P=.34). There was a 13% loss-to-follow-up rate, and therefore we did not meet appropriate power to detect a difference. There were no differences in overall sexual function or Patient Global Impression of Improvement scores between groups at 3 months and 6 months. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in de novo dyspareunia rates, overall postoperative sexual function scores, or global improvement scores between those using vaginal dilators compared with control patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01299363. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

A case–control study of risk factors for ileus and bowel obstruction following benign gynecologic surgery

To identify risk factors leading to the development of postoperative ileus and small‐bowel obstruction (SBO) after benign gynecologic surgery.

Management of ileus and small-bowel obstruction following benign gynecologic surgery.

To describe practice preferences for the diagnosis and management of ileus and small‐bowel obstruction (SBO) following benign gynecologic surgery.

Intraoperative ear bleeding with bilateral otorrhagia during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Background Spontaneous perioperative otorrhagia is an extremely rare entity with only 4 cases reported in the literature to date, all of which were recognized after the termination of the procedure. Case We describe the first reported case of otorrhagia recognized intraoperatively causing abortion of the procedure in a 60-year-old woman undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Otoscopy by the otolaryngology service revealed multiple intracutaneous hematomas and bleeding in bilateral external auditory canals. Computed tomography scan of the head revealed no intracranial hemorrhage. She underwent postoperative drainage by the otolaryngology service with no permanent ear-related sequelae. Conclusions We present the fifth reported case of spontaneous perioperative otorrhagia, the first of which to be noticed intraoperatively and cause premature termination of the procedure. The etiology is postulated to be increased arterial and venous pressures causing rupture of subcutaneous capillaries. In our case, several factors may have contributed to this event, including steep Trendelenburg patient positioning, intraperitoneal carbon dioxide insufflation from laparoscopy, and an intraoperative hypertensive episode.

Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically review the literature on apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery with uterine preservation compared with prolapse surgeries including hysterectomy and provide evidence‐based guidelines. DATA SOURCES: The sources for our data were MEDLINE, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to January 2017. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We accepted randomized and nonrandomized studies of uterine‐preserving prolapse surgeries compared with those involving hysterectomy. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Studies were extracted for participant information, intervention, comparator, efficacy outcomes, and adverse events, and they were individually and collectively assessed for methodological quality. If 3 or more studies compared the same surgeries and reported the same outcome, a meta‐analysis was performed. RESULTS: We screened 4467 abstracts and identified 94 eligible studies, 53 comparing uterine preservation to hysterectomy in prolapse surgery. Evidence was of moderate quality overall. Compared with hysterectomy plus mesh sacrocolpopexy, uterine preservation with sacrohysteropexy reduces mesh exposure, operative time, blood loss, and surgical cost without differences in prolapse recurrence. Compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension, uterine preservation in the form of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy improves the C point and vaginal length on the pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain and functioning, and hospital stay, but open abdominal sacrohysteropexy worsens bothersome urinary symptoms, operative time, and quality of life. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy (vs with hysterectomy) decreases mesh exposure, reoperation for mesh exposure, postoperative bleeding, and estimated blood loss and improves posterior pelvic organ prolapse quantification measurement. Transvaginal uterosacral or sacrospinous hysteropexy or the Manchester procedure compared with vaginal hysterectomy with native tissue suspension both showed improved operative time and estimated blood loss and no worsening of prolapse outcomes with uterine preservation. However, there is a significant lack of data on prolapse outcomes >3 years after surgery, the role of uterine preservation in obliterative procedures, and longer‐term risk of uterine pathology after uterine preservation. CONCLUSION: Uterine‐preserving prolapse surgeries improve operating time, blood loss, and risk of mesh exposure compared with similar surgical routes with concomitant hysterectomy and do not significantly change short‐term prolapse outcomes. Surgeons may offer uterine preservation as an option to appropriate women who desire this choice during apical prolapse repair.