Melanie Meister

Definitions of apical vaginal support loss: a systematic review

Objective: We sought to identify and summarize definitions of apical support loss utilized for inclusion, success, and failure in surgical trials for treatment of apical vaginal prolapse. Background: Pelvic organ prolapse is a common condition affecting more than 3 million women in the US, and the prevalence is increasing. Prolapse may occur in the anterior compartment, posterior compartment or at the apex. Apical support is considered paramount to overall female pelvic organ support, yet apical support loss is often underrecognized and there are no guidelines for when an apical support procedure should be performed or incorporated into a procedure designed to address prolapse. Study Design: A systematic literature search was performed in 8 search engines: PubMed 1946‐, Embase 1947‐, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Review Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, and FirstSearch Proceedings, using key words for apical pelvic organ prolapse and apical suspension procedures through April 2016. Searches were limited to human beings using human filters and articles published in English. Study authors (M.R.L.M., J.L.L.) independently reviewed publications for inclusion based on predefined variables. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they satisfied any of the following criteria: (1) apical support loss was an inclusion criterion in the original study, (2) apical support loss was a surgical indication, or (3) an apical support procedure was performed as part of the primary surgery. Results: A total of 4469 publications were identified. After review, 35 articles were included in the analysis. Prolapse‐related inclusion criteria were: (1) apical prolapse (n = 20, 57.1%); (2) overall prolapse (n = 8, 22.8%); or (3) both (n = 6, 17.1%). Definitions of apical prolapse (relative to the hymen) included: (1) apical prolapse >–1 cm (n = 13, 50.0%); (2) apical prolapse >+1 cm (n = 7, 26.9%); (3) apical prolapse >50% of total vaginal length (–[total vaginal length/2]) (n = 4, 15.4%); and (4) cervix/apex >0 cm (n = 2, 7.7%). Sixteen of the 35 studies (45.7%) required the presence of symptoms for inclusion. A measurement of the apical compartment (relative to the hymen) was used as a measure of surgical success or failure in 17 (48.6%) studies. Definitions for surgical success included: (1) prolapse stage >2 in each compartment (n = 5, 29.4%); (2) prolapse >–[total vaginal length/2] (n = 2, 11.8%); (3) apical support >–[total vaginal length/3] (n = 1, 5.9%); (4) absence of prolapse beyond the hymen (n = 1, 5.9%); and (5) point C at ≥–5 cm (n = 2, 11.8%). Surgical failure was defined as: (1) apical prolapse ≥0 cm (n = 2, 11.8%); (2) apical prolapse ≥–1 cm (n = 2, 11.8%); (3) apical prolapse >–[total vaginal length/2] (n = 3, 17.6%); and (4) recurrent apical prolapse surgery (n = 1, 5.9%). Ten (28.6%) of the 35 studies also included symptomatic outcomes in the definition of success or failure. Conclusion: Among randomized, controlled surgical trials designed to address apical vaginal support loss, definitions of clinically significant apical prolapse for study inclusion and surgical success or failure are either highly variable or absent. These findings provide limited evidence of consensus and little insight into current expert opinion.

Utilization of apical vaginal support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy performed for benign conditions: a national estimate

BACKGROUND: Apical vaginal support is considered the keystone of pelvic organ support. Level I evidence supports reestablishment of apical support at time of hysterectomy, regardless of whether the hysterectomy is performed for prolapse. National rates of apical support procedure performance at time of inpatient hysterectomy have not been well described. OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate trends and factors associated with use of apical support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy for benign indications in a large national database. STUDY DESIGN: The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample was used to identify hysterectomies performed from 2004 through 2013 for benign indications. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to select both procedures and diagnoses. The primary outcome was performance of an apical support procedure at time of hysterectomy. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 3,509,230 inpatient hysterectomies performed for benign disease from 2004 through 2013. In both nonprolapse and prolapse groups, there was a significant decrease in total number of annual hysterectomies performed over the study period (P < .0001). There were 2,790,652 (79.5%) hysterectomies performed without a diagnosis of prolapse, and an apical support procedure was performed in only 85,879 (3.1%). There was a significant decrease in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (high of 4.0% in 2004 to 2.5% in 2013, P < .0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (large and medium), and hysterectomy type (vaginal and laparoscopically assisted vaginal) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure. During the study period, 718,578 (20.5%) inpatient hysterectomies were performed for prolapse diagnoses and 266,743 (37.1%) included an apical support procedure. There was a significant increase in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (low of 31.3% in 2005 to 49.3% in 2013, P < .0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (medium and large), and hysterectomy type (total laparoscopic and laparoscopic supracervical) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure. CONCLUSION: This national database study demonstrates that apical support procedures are not routinely performed at time of inpatient hysterectomy regardless of presence of prolapse diagnosis. Educational efforts are needed to increase awareness of the importance of reestablishing apical vaginal support at time of hysterectomy regardless of indication.

Discussion: ‘Gestational weight gain and hypertensive disorders,’ by MacDonald-Wallis et al

In the roundtable that follows, clinicians discuss a study published in this issue of the Journal in light of its methodology, relevance to practice, and implications for future research.

Techniques for Repair of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries

Importance Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASISs) complicate up to 11% of vaginal deliveries; obstetricians must be able to recognize and manage these technically challenging injuries. Objective The aim of this study was to share our approach for management of these challenging complications of childbirth based on a multidisciplinary collaboration between general obstetrician-gynecologists, maternal fetal medicine specialists, and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons established at our institution. Evidence Acquisition A systematic literature search was performed in 3 search engines: PubMed 1946-, EMBASE 1947-, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using keywords obstetric anal sphincter injuries and episiotomy repair. Results Identification should begin with an assessment of risk factors, notably nulliparity and operative vaginal delivery, consistently associated with the highest risk of OASISs, and proceed with a thorough examination to grade the degree of laceration. Repair should be performed or supervised by an experienced clinician in an operating room with either regional or general anesthesia. The external anal sphincter may be repaired using either an overlapping or end-to-end anastomosis. Providers should be comfortable with both approaches as the degree of laceration may necessitate one approach over the other. We advocate for use of monofilament suture on all layers to decrease risk of bacterial seeding, as well as preoperative antibiotics and postoperative bowel regimen, which are associated with improved outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance Long-term sequelae, including pain, dyspareunia, and fecal incontinence, significantly impact quality of life for many patients who suffer OASISs and may be avoided if evidence-based guidelines for recognition and repair are utilized.

Physical examination techniques for the assessment of pelvic floor myofascial pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain is characterized by the presence of trigger points, tenderness to palpation, and local or referred pain, and commonly involves the pelvic floor muscles in men and women. Pelvic floor myofascial pain in the absence of local or referred pain has also been observed in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms, and we have found that many patients report an improvement in these symptoms after receiving myofascial‐targeted pelvic floor physical therapy. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically review the literature for examination techniques used to assess pelvic floor myofascial pain in women. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a systematic literature search using strategies for the concepts of pelvic floor disorders, myofascial pain, and diagnosis in Ovid MEDLINE 1946‐, Embase 1947‐, Scopus 1960‐, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Articles were screened by 3 authors and included if they contained a description of a pelvic myofascial physical examination. RESULTS: In all, 55 studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, examination components varied significantly among the included studies and were frequently undefined. A consensus examination guideline was developed based on the available data and includes use of a single digit (62%, 34/55) to perform transvaginal palpation (75%, 41/55) of the levator ani (87%, 48/55) and obturator internus (45%, 25/55) muscles with a patient‐reported scale to assess the level of pain to palpation (51%, 28/55). CONCLUSION: Physical examination methods to evaluate pelvic musculature for presence of myofascial pain varied significantly and were often undefined. Given the known role of pelvic floor myofascial pain in chronic pelvic pain and link between pelvic floor myofascial pain and lower urinary tract symptoms, physicians should be trained to evaluate for pelvic floor myofascial pain as part of their physical examination in patients presenting with these symptoms. Therefore, the development and standardization of a reliable and reproducible examination is needed.

Obesity and Ovarian Aging (Diminished Ovarian Reserve and Menopause)

Ovarian aging ultimately results in the cessation of reproductive function and is thought to occur as a result of oocyte depletion. The associated hormonal changes are well defined, and the serum measurements of several of these hormones have been utilized to predict ovarian reserve in women presenting with infertility. Obesity is associated with subfertility and may contribute to pathologic ovarian aging, although a mechanism has yet to be defined. The evaluation of obese women presenting with infertility is complicated by the effect of obesity on markers of ovarian reserve. Additional investigation into the relationship between obesity and ovarian aging is needed to further clarify the role of increased adiposity on infertility, improve the success of assisted reproductive technologies in this population, and better counsel these patients.

Discussion: ‘Tachysystole in term labor,’ by Heuser et al

In the roundtable that follows, clinicians discuss a study published in this issue of the Journal in light of its methodology, relevance to practice, and implications for future research.