John N. Nguyen

Outcome After Anterior Vaginal Prolapse Repair : A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES: To report 1-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing polypropylene mesh–reinforced anterior vaginal prolapse repair with anterior colporrhaphy. METHODS: Seventy-six patients with stage II or greater anterior vaginal prolapse were randomly assigned to either colporrhaphy or polypropylene mesh repair. The primary outcome was recurrent stage II anterior vaginal prolapse, and secondary outcomes were effects on quality of life and sexual symptom scores, operative time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, and adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty-eight women had anterior colporrhaphy, and 37 had polypropylene mesh repair. One patient allocated to mesh repair withdrew from the study before surgery. Clinical and demographic data did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups. One year after surgery, optimal and satisfactory anterior vaginal support were obtained in 21 of 38 (55%) of the colporrhaphy group and 33 of 38 (87%) of the mesh group (P=.005). Patients in both groups reported less bother after surgery in both prolapse and urinary symptoms. The rates of de novo dyspareunia were 4 of 26 (16%) and 2 of 23 (9%) in the colporrhaphy and mesh groups, respectively. Two of 37 (5%) patients had vaginal mesh extrusion. Nine anterior colporrhaphy patients would have to have recurrent anterior vaginal prolapse to prevent one vaginal mesh extrusion. Neither serious adverse events nor deaths occurred in either group. CONCLUSION: Anterior vaginal prolapse repair with polypropylene mesh reinforcement offers lower anatomic recurrence than anterior colporrhaphy at one year. However, quality of life and sexual symptoms scores improved in both groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00535301 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

Comparison of 2 Transvaginal Surgical Approaches and Perioperative Behavioral Therapy for Apical Vaginal Prolapse: The OPTIMAL Randomized Trial

IMPORTANCE More than 300,000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) are commonly performed transvaginal surgeries to correct apical prolapse. Little is known about their comparative efficacy and safety, and it is unknown whether perioperative behavioral therapy with pelvic floor muscle training (BPMT) improves outcomes of prolapse surgery. OBJECTIVE To compare outcomes between (1) SSLF and ULS and (2) perioperative BPMT and usual care in women undergoing surgery for vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized trial of 374 women undergoing surgery to treat both apical vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence was conducted between 2008 and 2013 at 9 US medical centers. Two-year follow-up rate was 84.5%. INTERVENTIONS The surgical intervention was transvaginal surgery including midurethral sling with randomization to SSLF (n = 186) or ULS (n = 188); the behavioral intervention was randomization to receive perioperative BPMT (n = 186) or usual care (n = 188). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome for the surgical intervention (surgical success) was defined as (1) no apical descent greater than one-third into vaginal canal or anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen (anatomic success), (2) no bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms, and (3) no re-treatment for prolapse at 2 years. For the behavioral intervention, primary outcome at 6 months was urinary symptom scores (Urinary Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse), and primary outcomes at 2 years were prolapse symptom scores (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse) and anatomic success. RESULTS At 2 years, surgical group was not significantly associated with surgical success rates (ULS, 59.2% [93/157] vs SSLF, 60.5% [92/152]; unadjusted difference, -1.3%; 95% CI, -12.2% to 9.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5) or serious adverse event rates (ULS, 16.5% [31/188] vs SSLF, 16.7% [31/186]; unadjusted difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -7.7% to 7.4%; adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.6). Perioperative BPMT was not associated with greater improvements in urinary scores at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference, -6.7; 95% CI, -19.7 to 6.2), prolapse scores at 24 months (adjusted treatment difference, -8.0; 95% CI, -22.1 to 6.1), or anatomic success at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Two years after vaginal surgery for prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, neither ULS nor SSLF was significantly superior to the other for anatomic, functional, or adverse event outcomes. Perioperative BPMT did not improve urinary symptoms at 6 months or prolapse outcomes at 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00597935.

Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: The OPTIMAL randomized trial

IMPORTANCE More than 300,000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) are commonly performed transvaginal surgeries to correct apical prolapse. Little is known about their comparative efficacy and safety, and it is unknown whether perioperative behavioral therapy with pelvic floor muscle training (BPMT) improves outcomes of prolapse surgery. OBJECTIVE To compare outcomes between (1) SSLF and ULS and (2) perioperative BPMT and usual care in women undergoing surgery for vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized trial of 374 women undergoing surgery to treat both apical vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence was conducted between 2008 and 2013 at 9 US medical centers. Two-year follow-up rate was 84.5%. INTERVENTIONS The surgical intervention was transvaginal surgery including midurethral sling with randomization to SSLF (n = 186) or ULS (n = 188); the behavioral intervention was randomization to receive perioperative BPMT (n = 186) or usual care (n = 188). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome for the surgical intervention (surgical success) was defined as (1) no apical descent greater than one-third into vaginal canal or anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen (anatomic success), (2) no bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms, and (3) no re-treatment for prolapse at 2 years. For the behavioral intervention, primary outcome at 6 months was urinary symptom scores (Urinary Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse), and primary outcomes at 2 years were prolapse symptom scores (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse) and anatomic success. RESULTS At 2 years, surgical group was not significantly associated with surgical success rates (ULS, 59.2% [93/157] vs SSLF, 60.5% [92/152]; unadjusted difference, -1.3%; 95% CI, -12.2% to 9.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5) or serious adverse event rates (ULS, 16.5% [31/188] vs SSLF, 16.7% [31/186]; unadjusted difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -7.7% to 7.4%; adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.6). Perioperative BPMT was not associated with greater improvements in urinary scores at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference, -6.7; 95% CI, -19.7 to 6.2), prolapse scores at 24 months (adjusted treatment difference, -8.0; 95% CI, -22.1 to 6.1), or anatomic success at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Two years after vaginal surgery for prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, neither ULS nor SSLF was significantly superior to the other for anatomic, functional, or adverse event outcomes. Perioperative BPMT did not improve urinary symptoms at 6 months or prolapse outcomes at 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00597935.

Colporrhaphy compared with mesh or graft-reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To report 2-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing standard anterior colporrhaphy with reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair using xenograft or synthetic mesh in women with symptomatic anterior vaginal wall prolapse. METHODS: Women with stage II or greater anterior prolapse were randomly assigned to three groups: anterior colporrhaphy, paravaginal repair with porcine dermis, or polypropylene mesh. Outcomes of prolapse stage, quality of life, degree of bother, and sexual symptoms were assessed by blinded examiners and validated measures at 2 years. Anatomic failure was defined as anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Composite failure was defined as symptoms of “bulge” and anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Power calculations determined 33 participants per arm would detect a 40% difference in anatomic success between standard and grafted repair. &khgr;2, Mann-Whitney U, and Students t tests were used for comparisons. RESULTS: Of the 99 participants enrolled, 78 (79%) completed a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Those with mesh had a significantly lower anatomic failure rate (18%) than both the porcine (46%, P=.015) and colporrhaphy groups (58%, P=.002). All groups had statistically similar reductions in their prolapse and urinary symptom subscale scores. Composite failure was not statistically different between groups: 13% colporrhaphy, 12% porcine, and 4% mesh. Two reoperations for anterior prolapse occurred in the porcine group. Mesh erosion rates were 14% for the mesh group. CONCLUSION: Vaginal paravaginal repair with polypropylene mesh has the lowest anatomic failure rate when compared with that with xenograft and anterior colporrhaphy without differences in composite failures. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT0139171. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

Impact of urodynamic based incontinence diagnosis on quality of life in women

To characterize the effect of urodynamic diagnosis on degree of incontinence related bother and health related quality of life in a large, multi‐ethnic population of women.

Two-Year Outcomes of Sacral Neuromodulation Versus OnabotulinumtoxinA for Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND Urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) is a chronic condition for which sacral neuromodulation (SNM) (InterStim/Medtronic) and onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) (BotoxA/Allergan) are utilized. These therapies have not been compared over extended time. OBJECTIVE To compare UUI episodes (UUIE) over 24 mo following SNM or BTX. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter, open-label, randomized, extension trial (February 2012-July 2016) at nine US medical centers involving 386 women with ≥6 UUIE over 3 d inadequately managed by medications. Participants were clinical responders to treatment: ≥50% reduction in UUIEs after SNM placement or 1 mo post BTX. INTERVENTION SNM (n=194) versus 200 U BTX (n=192). SNM reprogrammings occurred throughout the 24 mo. After 6 mo, two additional BTX injections were allowed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Primary outcome: change in mean daily UUIE over 24 mo. SECONDARY OUTCOMES no UUIE, ≥75% and ≥50% UUIE reduction; Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form; Urinary Distress Inventory short form; Incontinence Impact Questionnaire; Patient Global Impression of Improvement; Overactive Bladder Satisfaction of Treatment Questionnaire; and adverse events (AEs). Primary analysis used a linear mixed model. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Outcome data were available for 260/298 (87%) clinical responders. No difference in decreased mean UUIE was found over 24 mo (-3.88 vs -3.50 episodes/d,95% confidence interval [CI]=-0.14-0.89; p=0.15), with no differences in UUI resolution, ≥75% or ≥50% UUIE reduction. BTX group maintained higher satisfaction (mean difference=-9.14, 95% CI=-14.38--3.90; p<0.001), treatment endorsement (mean difference=-12.16, 95% CI=-17.7--6.63; p<0.001) through 24 mo. Other secondary measures did not differ. Recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) were higher after BTX (24% vs 10%; p<0.01), 6% required intermittent catheterization post second injection. SNM revision and removals occurred in 3% and 9% patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Both treatments offered sustainable UUI improvement, and higher BTX dosing had low clean intermittent catheterization rates, but with UTI risk. SNM revision/removal rates were low due to standardized lead placement with strict treatment response definitions. PATIENT SUMMARY We compared a large group of US women with severe urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) who received sacral neuromodulation (InterStim) or onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox A) therapy during a 2-yr period. We found that both therapies had similar success in reducing UUI symptoms, and adverse events were low. However, women in the BotoxA group had higher satisfaction and endorsement with their treatment, but with a higher chance of a urinary tract infection. We conclude that both therapies offer sustained reduction in daily incontinence over 2 yr.

Review of the diagnosis, management and treatment of fecal incontinence.

Abstract Fecal incontinence is a common problem affecting women but is underreported because of patients’ reluctance to discuss their symptoms and an inconsistent use of screening tools by physicians. Obstetric injury from vaginal delivery is the principal cause of fecal incontinence among young women. Prevalence rates are highest in the elderly, especially those with declining cognitive function. There are multiple diagnostic tests including anal manometry, endosonography, defecography, and pudendal nerve latency testing to assist physicians in the workup of patients and aid in the selection of appropriate treatment options. After patient identification and workup, most patients can be offered conservative measures including dietary measures and biofeedback. Surgery is indicated for specific abnormalities such as rectal prolapse, fistula, and recent obstetrical sphincter injury repair. Management of refractory cases may include sacral nerve stimulation and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation. Fecal diversion or an artificial bowel sphincter may be considered when all else has failed. Primary care physicians, gynecologists, and specialists in female pelvic medicine should screen women for fecal incontinence. Initial conservative therapy may be directed by the primary health provider, and those resistant to this approach should be referred to specialist care.

Adverse events associated with pelvic organ prolapse surgeries that use implants.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the rate of vaginal implant exposure associated with biologic grafts and permanent mesh used for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, to describe treatments used for these complications, and to estimate response rates to these treatments. The secondary aims were to describe the operative and perioperative complications. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of female members of Kaiser Permanente Southern and Northern California and Hawaii who underwent POP surgeries with biologic grafts and permanent mesh between September 2008 and May 2010. Inpatient and outpatient electronic medical records were reviewed for postoperative adverse events. RESULTS: During the 21-month period, 1,282 women, mean age of 62 years (±10 standard deviation), median parity of 3 (interquartile range 2–4), and median body mass index of 28 (interquartile range 24–30) underwent prolapse repairs with 1,484 implants with a mean follow-up time of 358 days (±276 standard deviation). Vaginal exposures occurred more often with permanent mesh (53/847 [6%]) than biologic grafts (10/637 [1.6%]) (P<.001). Resolution of vaginal exposure after the first treatment occurred in 24 of 63 (38%), whereas 39 of 63 (62%) required multiple treatments. Surgical excision was performed in 20 of 63 (32%) exposures. Permanent mesh exposures were more likely to require surgical excision (20/53 [38%]) than biologic graft exposures (zero of 10) (P=.02). CONCLUSION: Vaginal exposure occurred more frequently with permanent mesh than biologic graft, may require multiple treatments, and occasionally require surgical excision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II

Adherence to oral therapy for urgency urinary incontinence: Results from the anticholinergic versus botox comparison (ABC) trial

Objectives Medication adherence with urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) treatment is challenging and the best assessment methodology is uncertain. We sought to describe adherence with anticholinergic (AC) versus placebo (P) by comparing pill counts and MEMSCAP event data and to identify factors associated with adherence. Methods The randomized controlled AC versus Botox Comparison trial of women with moderate to severe idiopathic UUI included 126 participants initiating AC plus P bladder injection and 121 receiving P pills plus Botox injection. Adherence data on 243 participants (124 AC and 119 P) were calculated by pill count and MEMSCAP data for each 2-month interval during the 6-month study that allowed for dose escalation/drug change. Overall composite adherence estimates were calculated using the average of both methods and weighted by the duration of each 2-month interval. Results Treatment groups had no significant differences in dosing duration (P = 0.76) or mean adherence (AC, 83.3% [16.8] vs P, 84.8% [13.8]). Only 53% of women met the dichotomous outcome of more than 80% adherence during all intervals. Correlation between adherence by pill counts versus MEMSCAP decreased over time with pill counts demonstrating higher adherence than MEMSCAP (r = 0.53, 0.50, and 0.36 for each 2-month interval). Lower adherence was associated with higher baseline incontinence severity and better UUI quality of life for the AC group and with current smoking status in both groups. Conclusions Adherence using pill counts and MEMSCAP was reasonably correlated and similar in both the AC and P groups. In the AC group, higher baseline incontinence severity and better UUI Quality of Life were associated with decreased adherence. Smokers were less adherent.