Reconstructive Surgery at Hysterectomy for Patients With Uterine Prolapse and Gynecologic Malignancy.

In this cross-sectional study examining 211,708 patients with a diagnosis of uterine prolapse who underwent hysterectomy between 2016 and 2019 identified in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample, co-diagnosis of gynecologic malignancy was reported in 2,398 (1.1%) patients, and they were less likely to receive reconstructive surgery at hysterectomy (odds ratio [OR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.96). This absence of reconstructive surgery was most pronounced among patients with complete uterine prolapse and gynecologic malignancy (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57-0.81). The association was also consistent in coexisting gynecologic premalignancy (n=3,357 [1.6%]). In conclusion, this national-level assessment suggests that patients with uterine prolapse and coexisting gynecologic malignancy or premalignancy may be less likely to receive reconstructive surgery for pelvic floor dysfunction at hysterectomy.

Incidence, characteristics, and maternal outcomes of pregnancy with uterine prolapse.

BACKGROUND: Gravid uterine prolapse refers to abnormal descent of the uterus during pregnancy. It is a rare pregnancy complication and its clinical characteristics and obstetrical outcomes are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the national-level incidence, characteristics, and maternal outcomes of pregnancies complicated by gravid uterine prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's National Inpatient Sample. The study population was 14,647,670 deliveries from January 2016 to December 2019. The exposure assignment was the diagnosis of uterine prolapse. The coprimary outcome measures were incidence rate, clinical and pregnancy characteristics, and delivery outcomes of patients with gravid uterine prolapse. The inverse probability of treatment weighting cohort was created to mitigate the difference in prepregnancy confounding factors, followed by adjusting for pregnancy and delivery factors. RESULTS: The incidence of gravid uterine prolapse was 1 in 4209 deliveries (23.8 per 100,000). In a multivariable analysis, older age (≥40 years; adjusted odds ratio, 3.21; 95% confidence interval, 2.70-3.81); age from 35 to 39 years (adjusted odds ratio, 2.66; 95% confidence interval, 2.37-2.99); Black (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.63), Asian (adjusted odds ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.64), and Native American (adjusted odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-2.88) race/ethnicity; tobacco use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.37); grand multiparity (adjusted odds ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.55); and history of pregnancy losses (adjusted odds ratio, 2.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-3.26) were the patient characteristics associated with increased risk of gravid uterine prolapse. Current pregnancy characteristics associated with gravid uterine prolapse included cervical insufficiency (adjusted odds ratio, 3.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.94-5.45), preterm labor (adjusted odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.97), preterm premature rupture of membranes (adjusted odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.94), and chorioamnionitis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.28). Delivery characteristics associated with gravid uterine prolapse included early-preterm delivery at <34 weeks' gestation (69.1 vs 32.0 per 1000; adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-2.59) and precipitate labor (35.2 vs 20.1; adjusted odds ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-2.44). Moreover, risks of postpartum hemorrhage (112.1 vs 44.4 per 1000; adjusted odds ratio, 2.70; 95% confidence interval, 2.20-3.32), uterine atony (32.0 vs 15.7; adjusted odds ratio, 2.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-3.03), uterine inversion (9.6 vs 0.3; adjusted odds ratio, 31.97; 95% confidence interval, 16.60-61.58), shock (3.2 vs 0.7; adjusted odds ratio, 4.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-12.40), blood product transfusion (22.4 vs 11.1; adjusted odds ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.18), and hysterectomy (7.5 vs 2.3; adjusted odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-6.51) were increased in the gravid uterine prolapse group compared with the nonprolapse group. Conversely, patients with gravid uterine prolapse were less likely to deliver via cesarean delivery compared with those without gravid uterine prolapse (200.6 vs 322.8 per 1000; adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.61). CONCLUSION: This nationwide analysis suggests that pregnancy with gravid uterine prolapse is uncommon but associated with several high-risk pregnancy characteristics and adverse delivery outcomes.

Seasonal fluctuation of in vitro fertilization encounters in the United States.

PURPOSE: To examine patient and hospital characteristics related to seasonal fluctuation in in vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined 33,077 oocyte retrievals identified in the National Ambulatory Surgery Sample. Exposure assignment was monthly IVF encounters: low-volume months (<25%ile), mid-volume months (≥25/<75%ile), and high-volume months (>75%ile). Main outcomes were patient and hospital characteristics related to the exposure groups, assessed with a multinomial regression model. RESULTS: The median IVF encounters were 977 per month, ranging from 657 to 1074 (absolute-difference 417). January, July, and December were the lowest-quartile volume months, ranging from 657 to 710 encounters per month (low-volume months). May, August, and November were the top-quartile volume months, ranging from 1049 to 1074 encounters per month (high-volume months). In a multivariable analysis, patients undergoing IVF in the low-volume months were younger and less likely to have infertility or comorbidities. Patients undergoing IVF in the high-volume months were more likely to have lower household income and receive IVF at urban teaching facilities. Northeastern residents were less likely to have IVF in the low-volume months but more likely to have IVF in the high-volume months. Sensitivity analyses showed that the lowest-to-highest variability in monthly IVF encounters was higher in Northeast region compared to other regions (320 vs 50-128); infertility patients compared to those without (317 vs 190); privately insured patients compared to self-pay (227 vs 156); and older patients compared to younger (234 vs 192). CONCLUSION: This study suggests substantial seasonal fluctuation in IVF oocyte retrieval in the USA based on patient and hospital factors.