Mamta M. Mamik

Sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: a systematic review and metaanalysis.

OBJECTIVE Understanding the long-term comparative effectiveness of competing surgical repairs is essential as failures after primary interventions for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) may result in a third of women requiring repeat surgery. STUDY DESIGN We conducted a systematic review including English-language randomized controlled trials from 1990 through April 2013 with a minimum 12 months of follow-up comparing a sling procedure for SUI to another sling or Burch urethropexy. When at least 3 randomized controlled trials compared the same surgeries for the same outcome, we performed random effects model metaanalyses to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS For midurethral slings (MUS) vs Burch, metaanalysis of objective cure showed no significant difference (OR, 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.89). Therefore, we suggest either intervention; the decision should balance potential adverse events (AEs) and concomitant surgeries. For women considering pubovaginal sling vs Burch, the evidence favored slings for both subjective and objective cure. We recommend pubovaginal sling to maximize cure outcomes. For pubovaginal slings vs MUS, metaanalysis of subjective cure favored MUS (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85). Therefore, we recommend MUS. For obturator slings vs retropubic MUS, metaanalyses for both objective (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.93-1.45) and subjective cure (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91-1.51) favored retropubic slings but were not significant. Metaanalysis of satisfaction outcomes favored obturator slings but was not significant (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.52-1.13). AEs were variable between slings; metaanalysis showed overactive bladder symptoms were more common following retropubic slings (OR, 1.413; 95% CI, 1.01-1.98, P = .046). We recommend either retropubic or obturator slings for cure outcomes; the decision should balance AEs. For minislings vs full-length MUS, metaanalyses of objective (OR, 4.16; 95% CI, 2.15-8.05) and subjective (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.36-5.17) cure both significantly favored full-length slings. Therefore, we recommend a full-length MUS. CONCLUSION Surgical procedures for SUI differ for success rates and complications, and both should be incorporated into surgical decision-making. Low- to high-quality evidence permitted mostly level-1 recommendations when guidelines were possible.

Vaginal Estrogen for Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively review and critically assess the literature on vaginal estrogen and its alternatives for women with genitourinary syndrome of menopause and to provide clinical practice guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to April 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and prospective comparative studies. Interventions and comparators included all commercially available vaginal estrogen products. Placebo, no treatment, systemic estrogen (all routes), and nonhormonal moisturizers and lubricants were included as comparators. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We double-screened 1,805 abstracts, identifying 44 eligible studies. Discrepancies were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Studies were individually and collectively assessed for methodologic quality and strength of evidence. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Studies were extracted for participant, intervention, comparator, and outcomes data, including patient-reported atrophy symptoms (eg, vaginal dryness, dyspareunia, dysuria, urgency, frequency, recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), and urinary incontinence), objective signs of atrophy, urodynamic measures, endometrial effects, serum estradiol changes, and adverse events. Compared with placebo, vaginal estrogens improved dryness, dyspareunia, urinary urgency, frequency, and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). Urinary tract infection rates decreased. The various estrogen preparations had similar efficacy and safety; serum estradiol levels remained within postmenopausal norms for all except high-dose conjugated equine estrogen cream. Endometrial hyperplasia and adenocarcinoma were extremely rare among those receiving vaginal estrogen. Comparing vaginal estrogen with nonhormonal moisturizers, patients with two or more symptoms of vulvovaginal atrophy were substantially more improved using vaginal estrogens, but those with one or minor complaints had similar symptom resolution with either estrogen or nonhormonal moisturizer. CONCLUSION: All commercially available vaginal estrogens effectively relieve common vulvovaginal atrophy-related complaints and have additional utility in patients with urinary urgency, frequency or nocturia, SUI and UUI, and recurrent UTIs. Nonhormonal moisturizers are a beneficial alternative for those with few or minor atrophy-related symptoms and in patients at risk for estrogen-related neoplasia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, CRD42013006656.

Nonsurgical management of heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of nonsurgical abnormal uterine bleeding treatments for bleeding control, quality of life (QOL), pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2012. We included randomized controlled trials of nonsurgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. Interventions included the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), progestins, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antifibrinolytics. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol, and placebo were allowed as comparators. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened 5,848 citations and extracted eligible trials. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of evidence. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. For reduction of menstrual bleeding in women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (71–95% reduction), combined OCPs (35–69% reduction), extended cycle oral progestins (87% reduction), tranexamic acid (26–54% reduction), and NSAIDs (10–52% reduction) were all effective treatments. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined OCPs, and antifibrinolytics were all superior to luteal-phase progestins (20% increase in bleeding to 67% reduction). The levonorgestrel intrauterine system was superior to combined OCPs and NSAIDs. Antifibrinolytics were superior to NSAIDs for menstrual bleeding reduction. Data were limited on other important outcomes such as QOL for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and for all outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. CONCLUSION: For the reduction in mean blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding presumed secondary to abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, we recommend the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system over OCPs, luteal-phase progestins, and NSAIDs. For other outcomes (QOL, pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events) and for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction, we were unable to make recommendations based on the limited available data.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively review and critically assess the available gynecologic surgery venous thromboembolism prophylaxis literature and provide clinical practice guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases from inception to July 2010. We included randomized controlled trials in gynecologic surgery populations. Interventions and comparators included graduated compression stockings, intermittent pneumatic compression, unfractionated heparin, and low molecular weight heparin; placebo and routine postoperative care were allowed as comparators. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: One thousand two hundred sixty-six articles were screened, and 14 randomized controlled trials (five benign gynecologic, nine gynecologic oncology) met eligibility criteria. In addition, nine prospective or retrospective studies with at least 150 women were identified and provided data on venous thromboembolism risk stratification, gynecologic laparoscopy, and urogynecologic populations. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Two reviewers independently screened articles with discrepancies adjudicated by a third. Eligible randomized controlled trials were extracted for these characteristics: study, participant, surgery, intervention, comparator, and outcomes data, including venous thromboembolism incidence and bleeding complications. Studies were individually and collectively assessed for methodologic quality and strength of evidence. Overall incidence of clinical venous thromboembolism was 0–2% in the benign gynecologic population. With use of intermittent pneumatic compression for benign major procedures, venous thromboembolism incidence was less than 1%. No venous thromboembolisms were identified in prospective studies of benign laparoscopic procedures. Overall quality of evidence in the benign gynecologic literature was poor. Gynecologic–oncology randomized controlled trials reported venous thromboembolism incidence (including “silent” venous thromboembolisms) of 0–14.8% with prophylaxis and up to 34.6% without prophylaxis. Fair quality of evidence supports that unfractionated heparin and intermittent pneumatic compression are both superior to placebo or no intervention but insufficient to determine whether heparins are superior to intermittent pneumatic compression for venous thromboembolism prevention. Combining two of three risks (aged 60 years or older, cancer, or personal venous thromboembolism history) substantially elevated the risk of venous thromboembolism. CONCLUSION: Intermittent pneumatic compression provides sufficient prophylaxis for the majority of gynecology patients undergoing benign surgery. Additional risk factors warrant the use of combined mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis.

Vaginal estrogen use in postmenopausal women with pelvic floor disorders: systematic review and practice guidelines.

Introduction and hypothesisRisk of pelvic floor disorders increases after menopause and may be linked to estrogen deficiency. We aimed to systematically and critically assess the literature on vaginal estrogen in the management of pelvic floor disorders in postmenopausal women and provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.MethodsMEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to July 2014 for randomized controlled trials of commercially available vaginal estrogen products compared with placebo, no treatment, or any medication for overactive bladder or urinary incontinence. We double-screened 1,805 abstracts and identified 12 eligible papers. Studies were extracted for participant information, intervention, comparator, efficacy outcomes, and adverse events, and they were individually and collectively assessed for methodological quality and strength of evidence.ResultsEvidence was generally of poor to moderate quality. Vaginal estrogen application before pelvic organ prolapse surgery improved the vaginal maturation index and increased vaginal epithelial thickness. Postoperative vaginal estrogen use after a midurethral sling resulted in decreased urinary frequency and urgency. Vaginal estrogen and immediate-release oxybutynin were similar in improvement of urinary urgency, frequency, and urgency urinary incontinence in women with overactive bladder, but oxybutynin had higher rates of side effects and discontinuation. Conversely, the addition of vaginal estrogen to immediate or extended-release tolterodine did not improve urinary symptoms more than tolterodine alone. One study reported an improvement in stress urinary incontinence with use of vaginal estrogen.ConclusionVaginal estrogen application may play a useful role as an adjunct in the management of common pelvic floor disorders in postmenopausal women.

Sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Traditional treatment options in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) include Burch urethropexy or pubovaginal slings. These procedures have become much less popular and less frequently performed with the development and increased use of synthetic midurethral slings (MUSs). These trends in practice have not been associated with dramatic improvements in outcomes, however, and up to a third of women require repeat surgery. Therefore, it is important to understand the comparative effectiveness of competing surgical repair procedures. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare objective and subjective cure rates in adult women with SUI treated with different surgical procedures. A systematic review was performed using the MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials databases to obtain English-language comparative studies, cohort studies, and systematic reviews published from 1990 through April 2013 comparing a sling procedure for SUI to another sling or to Burch urethropexy. For evaluation of outcomes, only peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials with at least 12 months of follow-up were included. The minimum requirement for meta-analysis was at least 3 randomized controlled trials that compared the same surgeries for the same outcome and provided adequate efficacy and adverse event data. A random-effects model meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs). Comparison ofMUS vs Burch urethropexy (open or laparoscopic):Meta-analysis of objective cure showed no significant difference between these 2 procedures (OR, 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73–1.89). There was also no difference between these 2 surgeries for outcomes of subjective cure, quality of life, or sexual function. Either an MUS or Burch procedure can be used. The choice should be based on potential adverse events and planned concomitant surgeries. Comparison of pubovaginal sling vs Burch urethropexy: Because the evidence favored pubovaginal slings for both subjective and objective cure, the authors recommended use of pubovaginal slings to maximize cure outcomes. Comparison of pubovaginal slings vs MUS: Meta-analysis of subjective cure favored MUS (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18–0.85). A meta-analysis for objective cure could not be performed because of inadequate data. Based on the subjective evidence for better cure, the authors recommended MUS. www.obgynsurvey.com | 586 Copyright

Interstitial ectopic pregnancy: conservative surgical management.

Introduction: Interstitial pregnancy is a rare and life-threatening condition. Diagnosis and appropriate management are critical in preventing morbidity and death. Case Description: Four cases of interstitial pregnancy are presented. Diagnostic laparoscopy followed by laparotomy and cornuostomy with removal of products of conception was performed in 1 case. Laparoscopic cornuostomy and removal of products of conception were performed in the subsequent 3 cases with some modifications of the technique. Subsequent successful reproductive outcomes are also presented. Discussion: Progressively conservative surgical measures are being used to treat interstitial pregnancy successfully, with no negative impact on subsequent pregnancies.

Preemptive analgesia for postoperative hysterectomy pain control: systematic review and clinical practice guidelines

Objective The objective of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of preemptive analgesia at pain control in women undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy. Data Sources Eligible studies, published through May 31, 2016, were retrieved through Medline, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Study Eligibility We included randomized controlled trials with the primary outcome of pain control in women receiving a preemptive medication prior to total abdominal hysterectomy. Comparators were placebo, different doses of the same medication as intervention, or other nonnarcotic or narcotic medication. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods Study data were extracted by one reviewer and confirmed by a second reviewer. For each outcome we graded the quality of the evidence. Studies were classified by the type of medication used and by outcome type. Results Eighty‐four trials met eligibility, with 69 included. Among nonnarcotic medications, paracetamol, gabapentin, and rofecoxib combined with gabapentin resulted in improvements in pain assessment compared with placebo and other nonnarcotic medications. Patient satisfaction was higher in patients who were given gabapentin combined with paracetamol compared with gabapentin alone. Use of preemptive paracetamol, gabapentin, bupivacaine, and phenothiazine resulted in less narcotic usage than placebo. All narcotics (ketamine, morphine, fentanyl) resulted in improved pain control compared with placebo. Narcotics had a greater reduction in pain assessment scores compared with nonnarcotics, and their use resulted in lower total narcotic usage. Conclusion Preemptive nonnarcotic and narcotic medications prior to abdominal hysterectomy decrease total narcotic requirements and improve patient postoperative pain assessment and satisfaction scores.

NON-SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF HEAVY MENSTRUAL BLEEDING: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND PRACTICE GUIDELINES

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of nonsurgical abnormal uterine bleeding treatments for bleeding control, quality of life (QOL), pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2012. We included randomized controlled trials of nonsurgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. Interventions included the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), progestins, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antifibrinolytics. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol, and placebo were allowed as comparators. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened 5,848 citations and extracted eligible trials. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of evidence. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. For reduction of menstrual bleeding in women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (71–95% reduction), combined OCPs (35–69% reduction), extended cycle oral progestins (87% reduction), tranexamic acid (26–54% reduction), and NSAIDs (10–52% reduction) were all effective treatments. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined OCPs, and antifibrinolytics were all superior to luteal-phase progestins (20% increase in bleeding to 67% reduction). The levonorgestrel intrauterine system was superior to combined OCPs and NSAIDs. Antifibrinolytics were superior to NSAIDs for menstrual bleeding reduction. Data were limited on other important outcomes such as QOL for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and for all outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. CONCLUSION: For the reduction in mean blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding presumed secondary to abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, we recommend the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system over OCPs, luteal-phase progestins, and NSAIDs. For other outcomes (QOL, pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events) and for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction, we were unable to make recommendations based on the limited available data.

Nonsurgical management of heavy menstrual bleeding

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of nonsurgical abnormal uterine bleeding treatments for bleeding control, quality of life (QOL), pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2012. We included randomized controlled trials of nonsurgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. Interventions included the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), progestins, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antifibrinolytics. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol, and placebo were allowed as comparators. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened 5,848 citations and extracted eligible trials. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of evidence. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. For reduction of menstrual bleeding in women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (71–95% reduction), combined OCPs (35–69% reduction), extended cycle oral progestins (87% reduction), tranexamic acid (26–54% reduction), and NSAIDs (10–52% reduction) were all effective treatments. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined OCPs, and antifibrinolytics were all superior to luteal-phase progestins (20% increase in bleeding to 67% reduction). The levonorgestrel intrauterine system was superior to combined OCPs and NSAIDs. Antifibrinolytics were superior to NSAIDs for menstrual bleeding reduction. Data were limited on other important outcomes such as QOL for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and for all outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. CONCLUSION: For the reduction in mean blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding presumed secondary to abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, we recommend the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system over OCPs, luteal-phase progestins, and NSAIDs. For other outcomes (QOL, pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events) and for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction, we were unable to make recommendations based on the limited available data.