Changes in Stress Urinary Incontinence Symptoms after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery: a Nationwide Cohort Study (FINPOP).

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Various strategies are employed to manage stress urinary incontinence (SUI) during pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery. This study was aimed at facilitating shared decision-making by evaluating SUI symptom changes, staged SUI procedures, and their prognostic factors following POP surgery without concomitant SUI intervention. METHODS: We analyzed 2,677 POP surgeries from a population-based observational cohort, excluding patients with prior SUI surgery. The outcome measures were subjective SUI utilizing the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 questionnaire and number of subsequent SUI procedures. Multivariable linear models were applied to identify predictors of persistent SUI, procedures for persistent SUI, and de novo SUI. The primary assessment occurred at the 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: At baseline, 50% (1,329 out of 2,677) experienced SUI; 35% (354 out of 1,005) resolved, an additional 14% (140 out 1,005) improved, and 5.1% (67 out of 1,308) underwent a procedure for persistent SUI. De novo SUI symptoms developed in 20% (218 out of 1,087), with 3.2% (35 out of 1,087) reporting bothersome symptoms; 0.8% (11 out of 1,347) underwent a procedure for de novo SUI. High baseline symptom severity increased the risk of persistent SUI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.65-2.53), whereas advanced preoperative apical prolapse decreased the risk (aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.93). De novo SUI was more common with advancing age (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05), baseline urgency urinary incontinence (aOR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06-1.38), and after transvaginal mesh surgery (aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.24-3.00). It was not dependent on the compartment or preoperative degree of prolapse. CONCLUSIONS: In a pragmatic setting, POP surgery results in a low rate of subsequent SUI procedures.

Pelvic organ prolapse surgery and overactive bladder symptoms-a population-based cohort (FINPOP).

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: It is unclear how compartment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) impacts overactive bladder (OAB) symptom severity or improvement after POP surgery. We hypothesized that anterior and apical prolapse are more strongly associated with OAB symptoms than posterior compartment prolapse. METHODS: A total of 2933 POP surgeries from a prospective population-based cohort were divided into two groups: (1) anterior and/or apical compartment surgery (± posterior repair), N = 2091; (2) posterior repair only, N = 478. Urinary frequency and urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) were evaluated using PFDI-20 (bothersome symptom: score 3-4) at baseline, 6, and 24 months. Association between degree of POP in specific compartments and symptoms at baseline was estimated with generalized linear models and between compartment of surgery and symptom improvement with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: At least one bothersome symptom was reported by 40% at baseline, 14% at 6, and 19% at 24 months. At baseline, urinary frequency was associated with degree of anterior and apical and UUI with anterior compartment prolapse. Women undergoing surgery for anterior/apical compartment started with worse symptoms and experienced greater improvement than women undergoing posterior compartment surgery. Bothersome frequency resolved in 82% after anterior/apical and in 63% after posterior compartment surgery. Bothersome UUI resolved in 75% after anterior/apical and in 61% after posterior compartment surgery. After surgery, symptom severity was comparable between groups. Bothersome de novo symptoms occurred in 1-3%. CONCLUSIONS: OAB symptoms are more strongly related to anterior and apical than to posterior compartment prolapse, but improvement is seen after surgery for any vaginal compartment.

Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for PFDI-20 and POPDI-6 in POP surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Patient-reported outcome measures are fundamental tools when assessing effectiveness of treatments. The challenge lies in the interpretation: which magnitude of change in score is meaningful for the patients? The minimal important difference (MID) is defined as the smallest difference in score that patients perceive as important. The Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) represents the value of score beyond which patients consider themselves well. We aimed to determine the MID and PASS for Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery. METHODS: We used data from 2704 POP surgeries from a prospective, population-based cohort. MID was determined with three anchor-based and one distribution-based method. PASS was defined using two different methods. Medians of the estimates were identified. RESULTS: The MID estimates with (1) mean change, (2) receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve, (3) 75th percentile, and (4) distribution-based method varied between 22.9-25.0 (median 24.2) points for PFDI-20 and 9.0-12.5 (median 11.3) for POPDI-6. The PASS cutoffs with (1) 75th percentile and (2) ROC curve method varied between 57.7-62.5 (median 60.0) for PFDI-20 and 16.7-17.7 (median 17.2) for POPDI-6. CONCLUSION: A mean difference of 24 points in the PFDI-20 or 11 points in the POPDI-6 can be used as a clinically relevant difference between groups. Postoperative scores ≤ 60 for PFDI-20 and ≤ 17 for POPDI-6 signify acceptable symptom state.

The relationship of defecation symptoms and posterior vaginal wall prolapse in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

BACKGROUND: Defecation symptoms are common among women with pelvic organ prolapse. However, the relationship between posterior vaginal wall prolapse and defecation symptoms remains debatable. Even though there is a plausible biomechanical rationale for posterior wall prolapse to cause obstructed defecation, previous studies have drawn contradictory conclusions regarding the association. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the association between posterior vaginal wall prolapse and defecation symptoms by assessing the following: (1) does prevalence of defecation symptoms increase along with posterior wall prolapse severity, (2) is postoperative symptom improvement greater in women who underwent posterior compartment procedures in comparison with those who did not, and (3) is symptom improvement related to the symptom's correlation with the degree of prolapse? STUDY DESIGN: We used data from a nationwide longitudinal cohort study with 3515 women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery. We measured the prevalence of 9 defecation symptoms at baseline and at 6 and 24 months after surgery using the short form of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory. Baseline degree of prolapse was categorized in stages as defined by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System. The relationship between the degree of posterior wall prolapse and prevalence of bothersome defecation symptoms was studied with logistic regression and adjusted for patient characteristics and severity of anterior wall and apical prolapse. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the longitudinal change in symptom prevalence in groups of participants with and without repair for posterior vaginal compartment. Correlations between symptom improvement and symptom dependency on the degree of prolapse was assessed by calculating Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The stage of posterior wall prolapse (stage 2 vs stage 0) correlated with splinting, straining, incomplete evacuation, fecal incontinence of liquid stool, pain during defecation, fecal urgency, and anorectal prolapse (adjusted odds ratios, 2.7, 2.1, 2.0, 1.5, 2.1, 1.4, and 2.2, respectively; P ≤ .007 for all). Flatal incontinence and fecal incontinence of solid stool were not associated with the severity of posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Obstructed defecation symptoms (splinting, straining, and incomplete evacuation) improved more in women undergoing posterior compartment surgery compared with women undergoing repair for other compartments. The greatest improvement at follow-up was observed for those symptoms that showed strongest association with the degree of prolapse at baseline. CONCLUSION: Obstructed defecation symptoms are dependent on the posterior wall anatomy. Women presenting with posterior wall prolapse, and these symptoms can expect to improve after surgery. Other defecation symptoms also improve after pelvic organ prolapse surgery, but they are not as specific to posterior wall anatomy as obstructed defecation symptoms.

Sequential gemcitabine-carboplatin followed by paclitaxel-carboplatin in the first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: A phase II study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and efficacy of sequential gemcitabine-carboplatin followed by paclitaxel-carboplatin in the first-line treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, with the response rate as the primary endpoint. METHODS: After primary laparotomy, 56 patients with FIGO Stages III-IV disease were given 4 cycles of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 d1,8 and carboplatin AUC5 (44 patients) or AUC6 (12 patients) d1 q3wk followed by 4 cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 d1 and carboplatin AUC5/6 q3wk. Of the tumors, 43 were serous, 6 clear cell, 4 endometrioid, and 3 anaplastic type. Thirty-seven (66.1%) of the patients were suboptimally debulked. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were evaluable for response by CA-125 criteria, and 46 (98%) responded. Thirty patients (after gemcitabine-carboplatin) and 24 (after paclitaxel-carboplatin) were evaluable for response by CT (RECIST criteria), respectively. After the four gemcitabine-carboplatin cycles, the objective response rate was 83% (6 CR, 19 PR). Following completion of the whole sequential regimen, 7 patients showed a CR and 15 a PR, respectively, giving a response rate of 92%. The median progression-free survival was 12.8 months after a median follow-up of 19 months (range 7-35 months). The median overall survival has not been reached yet. The main toxicity was neutropenia as 139/221 (62.9%) of the gemcitabine-carboplatin cycles and 92/181 (50.8%) of the paclitaxel-carboplatin cycles, respectively, were associated with Grades 3-4 neutropenia. Neutropenia was reported as a serious adverse event in 5.7% of the cycles, and G-CSF support was needed in 18.4% of the cycles. Only the gemcitabine-carboplatin cycles were associated with a marked thrombocytopenia (32.1% Grades 3-4). Of the other side effects, marked allergy occurred in 14/52 (27%) exposed to paclitaxel. A total of 14 patients discontinued the treatment prematurely: 3 due to lack of efficacy, 1 due to protocol violation, and 10 due to toxicity (4 allergic reactions to paclitaxel, 3 complicated neutropenias, 1 fever, and 2 unspecified toxicities). The mean relative dose intensities were: gemcitabine 84.0%, paclitaxel 85.4%, and carboplatin 96.5%. Of the gemcitabine-carboplatin cycles and paclitaxel-carboplatin cycles, 32% and 38% were delayed, respectively. Gemcitabine d8 dose had to be omitted in 8% of the cycles. CONCLUSION: The sequential regimen of gemcitabine-carboplatin followed by paclitaxel-carboplatin is feasible in chemotherapy-naive ovarian cancer. Although its use is associated with a marked neutropenia, the neutropenia is manageable.