Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury: Interpregnancy Interval and Route of Subsequent Delivery.

IMPORTANCE: Knowledge on the interpregnancy interval (IPI) among women with an obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is both limited and not well understood. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to describe the IPI among women with OASI and to compare women with OASI based on the route of subsequent obstetric delivery and OASI recurrence. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective single-cohort study of women who had an OASI between 2013 and 2015 at a tertiary academic medical center. Demographics, obstetric delivery data, postpartum sequelae, and subsequent pregnancy delivery data from 2013 to 2021 were collected. The IPI was defined as the time from date of first vaginal delivery to date of conception of the subsequent pregnancy. Women without a subsequent pregnancy were censored at the date of last contact. The IPI was evaluated using a survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier estimator). RESULTS: A total of 287 women experienced an OASI, and subsequent pregnancy occurred for 178 (62.0%) women. The median IPI was 26.4 months (95% confidence interval: 23.7-29.9) for women with a prior OASI. Of the 97 women who did not have a subsequent pregnancy documented during the study, the median follow-up was 64.0 months (interquartile range: 5.7-80.0). Subsequent delivery route data were available for 171 women; of those, 127 (74.3%) experienced a subsequent vaginal delivery and 44 (25.7%) experienced a cesarean delivery. Of the 127 women who experienced a subsequent vaginal delivery, 3 (2.4%) experienced a recurrent OASI. CONCLUSION: The IPI among women with OASI is similar to the IPI for all women in Ohio and in the United States.

Restrictive opioid prescribing after surgery for prolapse and incontinence: a randomized, noninferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are routinely prescribed for postoperative pain control after gynecologic surgery with growing evidence showing that most prescribed opioids go unused. Restrictive opioid prescribing has been implemented in other surgical specialties to combat the risk for opioid misuse and diversion. The impact of this practice in the urogynecologic patient population is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if a restrictive opioid prescription protocol is noninferior to routine opioid prescribing in terms of patient satisfaction with pain control after minor and major surgeries for prolapse and incontinence. STUDY DESIGN: This was a single-center, randomized, noninferiority trial of opioid-naïve patients who underwent minor (eg, colporrhaphy or mid-urethral sling) or major (eg, vaginal or minimally invasive abdominal prolapse repair) urogynecologic surgery. Patients were excluded if they had contraindications to all multimodal analgesia and if they scored ≥30 on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. Subjects were randomized on the day of surgery to the standard opioid prescription protocol (wherein patients routinely received an opioid prescription upon discharge [ie, 3-10 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone]) or to the restrictive protocol (no opioid prescription unless the patient requested one). All patients received multimodal pain medications. Participants and caregivers were not blinded. Subjects were asked to record their pain medication use and pain levels for 7 days. The primary outcome was satisfaction with pain control reported at the 6-week postoperative visit. We hypothesized that patient satisfaction with the restrictive protocol would be noninferior to those randomized to the standard protocol. The noninferiority margin was 15 percentage points. Pain level scores, opioid usage, opioid prescription refills, and healthcare use were secondary outcomes assessed for superiority. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were randomized, and 127 (64 in the standard arm and 63 in the restrictive arm) completed the primary outcome evaluation and were included in the analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the study groups, and this remained after adjusting for the surgery type. Major urogynecologic surgery was performed in 73.6% of the study population, and minor surgery was performed in 26.4% of the population. Same-day discharge occurred for 87.6% of all subjects. Patient satisfaction was 92.2% in the standard protocol arm and 92.1% in the restrictive protocol arm (difference, -0.1%; P=.004), which met the criterion for noninferiority. No opioid usage in the first 7 days after hospital discharge was reported by 48.4% of the patients in the standard protocol arm and by 70.8% in the restrictive protocol arm (P=.009). Opioid prescription refills occurred in 8.5% of patients with no difference between the study groups (9.4% in the standard arm vs 6.7% in the restrictive arm; P=.661). No difference was seen in the rate of telephone calls and urgent visits for pain control between the study arms. CONCLUSION: Among women who underwent minor and major surgery for prolapse and incontinence, patient satisfaction rates were noninferior after restrictive opioid prescribing when compared with routine opioid prescribing.

Is there an association between 6-month genital hiatus size and 24-month composite prolapse recurrence following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Although an enlarged postoperative genital hiatus (GH) size has been identified as a predictor of recurrence following pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, the protective role of concurrent level III support procedures to reduce the GH size at the time of minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MI-SCP) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to compare 24-month composite prolapse recurrence following MI-SCP between patients with a 6-month postoperative GH measurement of <3 cm versus ≥3 cm; and to explore the impact of concurrent level III support procedures on prolapse recurrence, bowel, and sexual function. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials of women who underwent MI-SCP from 2014 to 2020. Our primary outcome was composite prolapse recurrence defined as retreatment with either pessary or surgery, and/or subjective bothersome vaginal bulge. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated to identify a 6-month GH cutoff point associated with 24-month composite recurrence. RESULTS: Of the 108 women who met the inclusion criteria, 13 (12%) had composite prolapse recurrence at 24 months: 12 patients (11.1%) reported a bothersome vaginal bulge, and 3 patients (2.8%) underwent retreatment with surgery. A ROC curve demonstrated that a 6-month postoperative GH size of 3 cm had 84.6% sensitivity to predict vaginal bulge and/or retreatment at 24 months (area under curve = 0.52). There was no difference in the composite prolapse recurrence between the groups; however, only patients with a 6-month GH >3 cm underwent retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-four-month composite prolapse recurrence does not differ based on 6-month GH size; however, surgical failure may be more common in those with a GH size greater than 3 cm.

Postpartum urinary retention: an expert review.

Postpartum urinary retention is a relatively common condition that can have a marked impact on women in the immediate days following childbirth. If left untreated, postpartum urinary retention can lead to repetitive overdistention injury that may damage the detrusor muscle and the parasympathetic nerve fibers within the bladder wall. In rare circumstances, postpartum urinary retention may even lead to bladder rupture, which is a potentially life-threatening yet entirely preventable complication. Early diagnosis and timely intervention are necessary to decrease long-term consequences. There are 3 types of postpartum urinary retention: overt, covert, and persistent. Overt retention is associated with an inability to void, whereas covert retention is associated with incomplete bladder emptying. Persistent urinary retention continues beyond the third postpartum day and can persist for several weeks in rare cases. Recognition of risk factors and prompt diagnosis are important for proper management and prevention of negative sequelae. However, lack of knowledge by providers and patients alike creates barriers to accessing and receiving evidence-based care, and may further delay diagnosis for patients, especially those who experience covert postpartum urinary retention. Nationally accepted definitions and management algorithms for postpartum urinary retention are lacking, and development of such guidelines is essential for both patient care and research design. We propose intrapartum recommendations and a standardized postpartum bladder management protocol that will improve patient outcomes and contribute to the growing body of evidence-based practice in this field.

Postoperative pain and the need for intervention after sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy compared to colpopexy: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare postoperative pain between patients undergoing sacrospinous ligament colpopexy (SSLF) and hysteropexy (SSLH). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing native tissue SSLF and SSLH between January 2013 and March 2020. The electronic medical record was queried for demographic and perioperative data until the postoperative visit. The primary outcome was a composite incidence of any of the following: telephone calls, urgent office visits, additional analgesic prescriptions and need for intervention for pain in the buttocks, posterior thigh or perirectal area. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of persistent pain at the postoperative visit and perioperative risk factors associated with reported pain. RESULTS: A total of 406 patients met inclusion criteria (308 SSLF, 98 SSLH). The composite pain outcome was seen in 99 patients (24.4%; 95% CI 20.5%-28.8%), and there was no statistical difference between cohorts. Persistent pain was seen in 15.6% and 13.3% of SSLF and SSLH patients at 6 weeks (p = 0.58). Twelve patients (3.0%) underwent interventions for pain, including physical therapy (2), trigger point injections (5) and suture release (5). Compared to SSLF patients, SSLH patients were more likely to need interventions (7 [7.1%] vs. 5 [1.6%], p = 0.005) and office visits (14 [14.3%] vs. 13 [4.2%], p = 0.0005) for pain. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the overall incidence of postoperative pain between patients who underwent SSLF or SSLH. However, patients who underwent hysteropexy were more likely to need intervention and office evaluation for postoperative pain.

APACHE IV versus PPI for predicting community hospital ICU mortality.

BACKGROUND: Both the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV and Palliative Performance Index (PPI) are scales used to estimate intensive care unit (ICU) prognosis and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To Compare the diagnostic utility of the PPI and APACHE IV and their subsequent implications in predicting ICU mortality at a community hospital. DESIGN: This was a Prospective Cohort Study. SETTING: The study was conducted at the Community hospital ICU. PATIENTS: Participants were 211 patients admitted from December 24, 2008 to June 11, 2009. MEASUREMENTS: An observer gathered appropriate data and performed the APACHE IV and PPI scales within 24 hours of admission. Results were then analyzed using standard formulae. RESULTS: The study included 211 participants in total with 211 participants in the PPI group (n = 211) and 162 in the APACHE IV group (n = 162). The APACHE score and PPI were found to be significant for predicting ICU mortality (P value of P < .002 and 99% CI of 13.74 to 20.32, P value of P < .001and 99% CI of 3.70 to 4.61, respectively). APACHE IV demonstrated a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 96.0%, PPV of 64.7%, and NPV of 98.6%. In contrast, the PPI possessed a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 96.0%, PPV of 64.7%, and NPV of 97.8%. LIMITATIONS: Limitations may have occurred with the subjective nature of the PPI and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), along with meeting criterion for the APACHE IV. CONCLUSION: This prospective cohort study in the ICU of a community hospital demonstrated that both the APACHE IV and PPI were significant tools for predicting ICU mortality. When contrasting the 2 scales, the APACHE IV could more accurately rule in mortality when mortality occurred and rule out mortality when survival occurred.