Urinary microbiome community types associated with urinary incontinence severity in women.

BACKGROUND: Urinary microbiome (urobiome) studies have previously reported on specific taxa and community differences in women with mixed urinary incontinence compared with controls. Therefore, a hypothesis was made that higher urinary and vaginal microbiome diversity would be associated with increased urinary incontinence severity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test whether specific urinary or vaginal microbiome community types are associated with urinary incontinence severity in a population of women with mixed urinary incontinence. STUDY DESIGN: This planned secondary, cross-sectional analysis evaluated associations between the urinary and vaginal microbiomes and urinary incontinence severity in a subset of Effects of Surgical Treatment Enhanced With Exercise for Mixed Urinary Incontinence trial participants with urinary incontinence. Incontinence severity was measured using bladder diaries and Urinary Distress Inventory questionnaires collected at baseline. Catheterized urine samples and vaginal swabs were concurrently collected before treatment at baseline to assess the urinary and vaginal microbiomes. Of note, 16S rRNA V4 to V6 variable regions were sequenced, characterizing bacterial taxa to the genus level using the DADA2 pipeline and SILVA database. Using Dirichlet multinomial mixtures methods, samples were clustered into community types based on core taxa. Associations between community types and severity measures (Urinary Distress Inventory total scores, Urinary Distress Inventory subscale scores, and the number of urinary incontinence episodes [total, urgency, and stress] from the bladder diary) were evaluated using linear regression models adjusted for age and body mass index. In addition, alpha diversity measures for richness (total taxa numbers) and evenness (proportional distribution of taxa abundance) were analyzed for associations with urinary incontinence episodes and community type. RESULTS: Overall, 6 urinary microbiome community types were identified, characterized by varying levels of common genera (Lactobacillus, Gardnerella, Prevotella, Tepidimonas, Acidovorax, Escherichia, and others). The analysis of urinary incontinence severity in 126 participants with mixed urinary incontinence identified a Lactobacillus-dominated reference group with the highest abundance of Lactobacillus (mean relative abundance of 76%). A community characterized by fewer Lactobacilli (mean relative abundance of 19%) and greater alpha diversity was associated with higher total urinary incontinence episodes (2.67 daily leaks; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-4.59; P=.007) and urgency urinary incontinence episodes (1.75 daily leaks; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-3.27; P=.02) than the reference group. No significant association was observed between community type and stress urinary incontinence episodes or Urogenital Distress Inventory total or subscores. The composition of vaginal community types and urinary community types were similar but composed of slightly different bacterial taxa. Vaginal community types were not associated with urinary incontinence severity, as measured by bladder diary or Urogenital Distress Inventory total and subscale scores. Alpha diversity indicated that greater sample richness was associated with more incontinence episodes (observed genera P=.01) in urine. Measures of evenness (Shannon and Pielou) were not associated with incontinence severity in the urinary or vaginal microbiomes. CONCLUSION: In the urobiome of women with mixed urinary incontinence, a community type with fewer Lactobacilli and more diverse bacteria was associated with more severe urinary incontinence episodes (total and urgency) compared with a community type with high predominance of a single genus, Lactobacillus. Whether mixed urinary incontinence severity is due to lesser predominance of Lactobacillus, greater presence of other non-Lactobacillus genera, or the complement of bacteria consisting of urobiome community types remains to be determined.

Three-year outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of perioperative vaginal estrogen as adjunct to native tissue vaginal apical prolapse repair.

BACKGROUND: As the muscular and connective tissue components of the vagina are estrogen responsive, clinicians may recommend vaginal estrogen to optimize tissues preoperatively and as a possible means to reduce prolapse recurrence, but long-term effects of perioperative intravaginal estrogen on surgical prolapse management are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of perioperative vaginal estrogen vs placebo cream in reducing composite surgical treatment failure 36 months after native tissue transvaginal prolapse repair. STUDY DESIGN: This was an extended follow-up of a randomized superiority trial conducted at 3 tertiary US sites. Postmenopausal patients with bothersome anterior or apical vaginal prolapse were randomized 1:1 to 1-g conjugated estrogen cream (0.625 mg/g) or placebo, inserted vaginally twice weekly for ≥5 weeks preoperatively and continued twice weekly for 12 months postoperatively. All participants underwent vaginal hysterectomy (if the uterus was present) and standardized uterosacral or sacrospinous ligament suspension at the surgeon's discretion. The primary report's outcome was time to failure by 12 months postoperatively, defined by a composite outcome of objective prolapse of the anterior or posterior walls beyond the hymen or the vaginal apex descending below one-third the total vaginal length, subjective bulge symptoms, and/or retreatment. After 12 months, participants could choose to use-or not use-vaginal estrogen for atrophy symptom bother. The secondary outcomes included Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification points, subjective prolapse symptom severity using the Patient Global Impression of Severity and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and prolapse-specific subscales of the 20-Item Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-Short Form 7. Data were analyzed as intent to treat and "per protocol" (ie, ≥50% of expected cream use per medication diary). RESULTS: Of 206 postmenopausal patients, 199 were randomized, and 186 underwent surgery. Moreover, 164 postmenopausal patients (88.2%) provided 36-month data. The mean age was 65.0 years (standard deviation, 6.7). The characteristics were similar at baseline between the groups. Composite surgical failure rates were not significantly different between the estrogen group and the placebo group through 36 months, with model-estimated failure rates of 32.6% (95% confidence interval, 21.6%-42.0%) and 26.8% (95% confidence interval, 15.8%-36.3%), respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-2.66; P=.11). The results were similar for the per-protocol analysis. Objective failures were more common than subjective failures, combined objective and subjective failures, or retreatment. Using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, 75 of 80 estrogen participants (94%) and 72 of 76 placebo participants (95%) providing 36-month data reported that they were much or very much better 36 months after surgery (P>.99). These data included reports from 51 of 55 "surgical failures." Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification measurements, Patient Global Impression of Severity scores, and prolapse subscale scores of the 20-Item Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-Short Form 7 all significantly improved for both the estrogen and placebo groups from baseline to 36 months postoperatively without differences between the groups. Of the 160 participants providing data on vaginal estrogen usage at 36 months postoperatively, 40 of 82 participants (49%) originally assigned to the estrogen group were using prescribed vaginal estrogen, and 47 of 78 participants (60%) assigned to the placebo group were using vaginal estrogen (P=.15). CONCLUSION: Adjunctive perioperative vaginal estrogen applied ≥5 weeks preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively did not improve surgical success rates 36 months after uterosacral or sacrospinous ligament suspension prolapse repair. Patient perception of improvement remained very high at 36 months.

Patient perspectives in adverse event reporting after vaginal apical prolapse surgery.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical trials use systematic methodology to monitor adverse events and determine grade (severity), expectedness, and relatedness to treatments as determined by clinicians. However, patient perspectives are often not included in this process. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare clinician vs patient grading of adverse event severity in a urogynecologic surgical trial. Secondary objectives were to estimate the association of patient grading of adverse events with decision-making and quality of life outcomes and to determine if patient perspective changes over time. STUDY DESIGN: This was a planned supplementary study (Patient Perspectives in Adverse Event Reporting [PPAR]) to a randomized trial comparing 3 surgical approaches to vaginal apical prolapse. In the parent trial, adverse events experienced by patients were collected per a standardized protocol every 6 months during which clinicians graded adverse event severity (mild, moderate, severe/life-threatening). In this substudy, we obtained additional longitudinal patient perspectives for 19 predetermined "PPAR adverse events." Patients provided their own severity grading (mild, moderate, severe/very severe/life-threatening) at initial assessment and at 12 and 36 months postoperatively. Clinicians and patients were masked to each other's reporting. The primary outcome was the interrater agreement (kappa statistic) for adverse event severity between the initial clinician and patient assessment, combining patient grades of mild and moderate. The association between adverse event severity and the Decision Regret Scale, Satisfaction with Decision Scale, the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement scores was assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) for continuous scales, the Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test for Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and t tests or chi-square tests comparing the assessments of patients who rated their adverse events or symptoms as severe with those who gave other ratings. To describe patient perspective changes over time, the intraobserver agreement was estimated for adverse event severity grade over time using weighted kappa coefficients. RESULTS: Of the 360 randomly assigned patients, 219 (61%) experienced a total of 527 PPAR adverse events (91% moderate and 9% severe/life-threatening by clinician grading). Mean patient age was 67 years; 87% were White and 12% Hispanic. Among the patients reporting any PPAR event, the most common were urinary tract infection (61%), de novo urgency urinary incontinence (35%), stress urinary incontinence (22%), and fecal incontinence (13%). Overall agreement between clinician and participant grading of severity was poor (kappa=0.24 [95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.34]). Of the 414 adverse events that clinicians graded as moderate, patients graded 120 (29%) as mild and 80 (19%) as severe. Of the 39 adverse events graded as severe by clinicians, patients graded 15 (38%) as mild or moderate. Initial patient grading of the most severe reported adverse event was mildly correlated with worse Decision Regret Scale (ρ=0.2; P=.01), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (ρ=-0.24; P<.01), and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (P<.01) scores. There was no association between adverse event severity and Satisfaction with Decision Scale score. Patients with an initial grading of "severe" had more regret, lower quality of life, and poorer global impressions of health than those whose worst severity grade was mild (P<.05). Agreement between the patients' initial severity ratings and their ratings at 12 months (kappa=0.48 [95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.58]) and 36 months (kappa=0.45 [95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.53]) was fair. CONCLUSION: Clinician and patient perceptions of adverse event severity are discordant. Worse severity from the patient perspective was associated with patient-centered outcomes. Including the patient perspective provides additional information for evaluating surgical procedures.

Trial Design for Mixed Urinary Incontinence: Midurethral Sling Versus Botulinum Toxin A.

IMPORTANCE: Mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) is common and can be challenging to manage. OBJECTIVES: We present the protocol design and rationale of a trial comparing the efficacy of 2 procedures for the treatment of women with MUI refractory to oral treatment. The Midurethral sling versus Botulinum toxin A ( MUSA) trial compares the efficacy of intradetrusor injection of 100 U of onabotulinimtoxinA (an office-based procedure directed at the urgency component) versus midurethral sling (MUS) placement (a surgical procedure directed at the stress component). STUDY DESIGN: The MUSA is a multicenter, randomized trial of women with MUI electing to undergo procedural treatment for MUI at 7 clinical centers in the NICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Participants are randomized to either onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U or MUS. OnabotulinimtoxinA recipients may receive an additional injection between 3 and 6 months. Participants may receive additional treatment (including crossover to the alternative study intervention) between 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is change from baseline in Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include change in UDI at 3 and 12 months, irritative and stress subscores of the UDI, urinary incontinence episodes, predictors of poor treatment response, quality of life and global impression outcomes, adverse events, use of additional treatments, and cost effectiveness. RESULTS: Recruitment and randomization of 150 participants is complete and participants are currently in the follow-up phase. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will provide information to guide care for women with MUI refractory to oral treatment who seek surgical treatment with either onabotulinumtoxinA or MUS.