Age-specific reference scores for the PISQ-12 on female sexual functioning in the Netherlands: a retrospective population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Female sexual dysfunction is common in the general population, with age emerging as a significant determinant of sexual activity and functioning. AIM: To establish age-specific reference scores for the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) in the general Dutch female population. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted in the Netherlands. The study population comprised 2518 Dutch-speaking women aged ≥18 years, representing a cross section of the general Dutch population. The PISQ-12 was used to assess sexual functioning in heterosexual women. The Groningen Defecation and Fecal Continence questionnaire was utilized to demonstrate demographic factors. OUTCOMES: We established age-specific reference scores for the PISQ-12 in the general Dutch population. RESULTS: Of the 2518 women, 1592 (63.2%) were sexually active and 926 (36.8%) were not. Further analysis focused on the sexually active group: we found a decrease in mean total PISQ scores, ranging from 38.34 among 18- to 34-year-olds to 36.98 among ≥65-year-olds. Older women scored lower in the behavior domain, specifically pertaining to sexual desire (P < .001) and sexual excitement (P < .001). They also had lower scores in the partner-related domain regarding partner problems of erection (P < .001) and orgasm perception (P < .001). With increasing age, negative emotional reaction scores were higher (P < .001). In the physical domain, we observed significantly different scores for pain during sexual intercourse (P < .001) and restrictions in sexual activity due to fear of urinary leakage (P < .001), with the lowest scores in the youngest group. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These age-specific references scores of the PISQ-12 provide an overview of sexual functioning of a general population, which enables caregivers to assess and interpret patients' individual scores more accurately. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: We included only sexually active women in our subanalyses, potentially introducing selection bias for older women with better physical conditions. The study's strength lies in its extensive sample size, representing a cross section of the general Dutch population. Furthermore, the self-administered questionnaire approach helped minimize embarrassment and obtain realistic responses. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated age-specific PISQ-12 reference scores and highlighted associations between aging and diminishing scores of sexual desire, sexual excitement, erection problems, and orgasm perception, while women aged 18 to 34 years reported the lowest scores for pain during intercourse and limited sexual activity due to fear of urinary leakage.

The Role of Self-Management in Pessary Therapy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse-A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study investigated pessary self-management (PSM). The primary outcome was how often PSM was taught to patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Secondary outcomes were associations of PSM with treatment continuation, side effects, changing to surgery, and number of doctor consultations in the first year after treatment initiation compared with clinical management (CM). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 300 patients visiting three Dutch medical centres in 2019, and receiving a pessary for POP. The t test, Chi-squared test and logistic regression were performed to compare PSM with CM and to identify factors associated with treatment continuation. RESULTS: A total of 35% of patients received PSM instructions, of which 92% were able to perform PSM successfully. Treatment was continued by 83% of patients practicing PSM and 75% of patients having CM (p = 0.16), side effects occurred in 26% and 39% respectively (p = 0.18). Pain or discomfort was associated with treatment discontinuation (p < 0.01). In a subgroup analysis of patients who had a pessary suitable for PSM, treatment continuation was significantly higher in the PSM group (97%) than in the CM group (74%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pessary self-management was only taught to 35% of patients who received a pessary, although the ability to perform PSM was high (92%). Treatment discontinuation was significantly lower in the PSM subgroup, when assessing the subgroup of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM. The large number of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM in the CM group implies that there is a lot to gain by promoting PSM.

Association of Constipation with Modes of Delivery: A Retrospective Questionnaire-based Study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic floor damage can contribute to pelvic floor dysfunction, including constipation. Most studies focus on constipation during pregnancy, whereas information regarding the mode of delivery in relation to constipation is limited. We hypothesise that women with a history of vaginal delivery report constipation more often than women with a history of caesarean section. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional multicentre study conducted in the Netherlands. All included patients (n = 2,643) completed the Groningen Defecation and Fecal Continence questionnaire to assess bowel problems of the last 6 months. Parametric tests, Chi-squared, univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 2,643 parous women, 2,248 delivered vaginally (85.1%) and 395 (14.9%) by caesarean section. Altogether, 649 women (24.6%) suffered from constipation. Women in the vaginal delivery group were constipated more often than women in the caesarean section group (25.5% versus 19.0%, p = 0.005). For women who had delivered vaginally, multivariable regression analysis showed an odds ratio for constipation of 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.109-1.938, p = 0.007). The odds ratio for constipation in women with a spontaneous perineal tear was 1.4 times higher than in women with an intact perineum (p = 0.030). Furthermore, the vaginal delivery group reported difficulties regarding bowel emptying (p = 0.048), straining (p = 0.027), incomplete defecation (p = 0.043), not able to defecate daily (p = 0.018), manually assisted defecation (p = 0.015) and had higher Renzi scores (p = 0.043) more often. CONCLUSIONS: Women in the vaginal delivery group have higher prevalences and odds ratios for constipation. Furthermore, a perineal tear during vaginal delivery increases the odds ratio for constipation.

Patient's preference for sacrospinous hysteropexy or modified Manchester operation: A discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate women's preference for modified Manchester (MM) or sacrospinous hysteropexy (SH) as surgery for uterine prolapse. DESIGN: Labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE). SETTING: Eight Dutch hospitals. POPULATION: Women with uterine prolapse, eligible for primary surgery and preference for uterus preservation. METHODS: DCEs are attribute-based surveys. The two treatment options were labelled as MM and SH. Attributes in this survey were treatment success ( levels SH: 84%, 89%, 94%; levels MM: 89%, 93%, 96%), dyspareunia (levels: 0%, 5%, 10%), cervical stenosis (levels: 1%, 6%, 11%) and severe buttock pain (levels: 0%, 1%). A different combination of attribute levels was used in each choice set. Women completed nine choice sets, making a choice based on attribute levels. Data were analysed in multinomial logit models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's preference for MM or SH. RESULTS: 137 DCEs were completed (1233 choice sets). SH was chosen in 49% of the choice sets, MM in 51%. Of all women, 39 (28%) always chose the same surgery. After exclusion of this group, 882 choice sets were analysed, in which women preferred MM, likely associated with a labelling effect, i.e. description of the procedure, rather than the tested attributes. In that group, MM was chosen in 53% of the choice sets and SH in 47%. When choosing MM, next to the label, dyspareunia was relevant for decision-making. For SH, all attributes were relevant for decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: The preference of women for MM or SH seems almost equally divided. The variety in preference supports the importance of individualised healthcare.

Cost-effectiveness of urethral bulking polydimethylsiloxane-Urolastic® compared with mid-urethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence: A two-arm cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of urethral bulking polydimethylsiloxane-Urolastic® (PDMS-U) compared with mid-urethral sling (MUS) surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) at 1-year follow-up. DESIGN: Prospective, two-arm cohort study with 2-year follow-up. SETTING: International multicentre. POPULATION: Women with moderate to severe SUI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was subjective cure (Patient Global Impression of Improvement). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: objective cure (negative cough stress test), Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6), complications and re-interventions. Cost-effectiveness outcomes: total costs, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) using IIQ7-scores (Incontinence Impact Questionnaire) and EQ-5D-5L, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and monetary benefit (adjusted for baseline confounders). RESULTS: In all, 131 PDMS-U and 153 MUS surgery patients were treated. Subjective cure rates for MUS surgery and PDMS-U were, respectively: 101/112 (90%) versus 40/87 (46%), adjusted odds ratio (aOR; for age, body mass index [BMI], severity, type of urinary incontinence and previous SUI procedure) was 4.9. Objective cure rates for MUS surgery and PDMS-U were respectively: 98/109 (90%) versus 58/92 (63%), aOR 5.4. Average total costs for PDMS-U and MUS surgery were €3567 and €6688. ICER for MUS surgery cost €15 598 per IIQ QALY and €37 408 per EQ-5D-5L QALY. With a willingness to pay (WTP) of €25 000, MUS has a 84% chance of being cost-effective using IIQ, whereas PDMS-U has a 99% chance of being cost-effective using EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSION: MUS surgery is more cost-effective in realising improved disease-specific quality of life (QoL), while PDMS-U is more cost-effective in realising improved generic QoL.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomised controlled trial and prospective cohort (SALTO-2 trial).

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) or vaginal sacrospinous fixation (VSF) is the most optimal surgical treatment in patients with POP-Q stage ≥2 vaginal vault prolapse (VVP). DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) and prospective cohort study alongside. SETTING: Seven non-university teaching hospitals and two university hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Patients with symptomatic post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse, requiring surgical treatment. METHODS: Randomisation in a 1:1 ratio to LSC or VSF. Evaluation of prolapse was done using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q). All participants were asked to fill in various Dutch validated questionnaires 12 months postoperatively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life. Secondary outcomes included composite outcome of success and anatomical failure. Furthermore, we examined peri-operative data, complications and sexual function. RESULTS: A total of 179 women, 64 women randomised and 115 women, participated in a prospective cohort. Disease-specific quality of life did not differ after 12 months between the LSC and VSF group in the RCT and the cohort (RCT: P = 0.887; cohort: P = 0.704). The composite outcomes of success for the apical compartment, in the RCT and cohort, were 89.3% and 90.3% in the LSC group and 86.2% and 87.8% in the VSF group, respectively (RCT: P = 0.810; cohort: P = 0.905). There were no differences in number of reinterventions and complications between both groups (reinterventions RCT: P = 0.934; cohort: P = 0.120; complications RCT: P = 0.395; cohort: P = 0.129). CONCLUSIONS: LSC and VSF are both effective treatments for vaginal vault prolapse, after a follow-up period of 12 months.

Comparing Single-Incision Midurethral Sling with Bulking Agents for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: Rationale for a Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Midurethral slings are considered the gold standard for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI), with an efficacy up to 80%. Another therapeutic option is the use of bulking agents, which create an artificial mass in the urethral submucosa, with an efficacy varying from 64% to 74%. Although bulking agents have a lower risk of complications than midurethral sling surgery, they are mainly used in case a midurethral sling is not an option or if midurethral sling surgery failed to cure stress urinary incontinence. In this study, we offer all patients with SUI in secondary care a choice between a single-incision midurethral sling procedure and treatment with a bulking agent. We want to examine patient preference and patient satisfaction for both procedures. We expect that offering both interventions in combination with standardized counselling will result in high patient satisfaction. DESIGN: In this non-randomized controlled trial, 266 patients will be objectively counselled for both interventions, after which all patients will choose between single-incision midurethral slings and polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAHG), followed by the standard care procedure for women with SUI. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: From January 1, 2021, onward, all consecutive adult patients (between 18 and 80 years of age) attending the outpatient gynaecology department with objectively confirmed, moderate to severe SUI will be eligible for enrolment in this non-randomized study. The primary outcome is patient satisfaction at 1 year, measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement; secondary outcomes are patient satisfaction at 3 months, objective and subjective cure at 3 months and 1 year, adverse events, post-operative pain, and cost-effectiveness. Differences in outcome measures will be assessed through logistic and linear regression analyses, both unadjusted and adjusted with covariate adjustment using the propensity score. RESULTS: No results are available yet. LIMITATIONS: The major disadvantage of this study design is the potential confounding bias. We intend to eliminate this bias by applying propensity scoring. CONCLUSION: By designing a non-randomized patient preference trial, we not only expect to demonstrate high patient satisfaction with both interventions but also provide insight into the possible role of PAHG-injections in the treatment of female SUI as a first-choice non-conservative treatment.

Development of an Algorithm for Cervical High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Based on Breath Print Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to develop an algorithm for the diagnosis of cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), based on patterns of volatile organic compounds, evaluated using an e-nose. METHODS: For this pilot study, the study population consisted of a group of 25 patients with histologically confirmed HSIL and a group of 26 controls. Controls consisted of women visiting the outpatient department for gynecological complaints unrelated to cancer. Women had a negative high-risk human papillomavirus and/or normal cytology (negative for intraepithelial lesions of malignancy) of their most recent test performed in the context of participation in routine cervical cancer screening. Breath tests were performed and labeled with the correct diagnosis. Machine-learning techniques were used to develop a model for predicting HSIL. Based on the receiver operating characteristics curve, both sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: Individual classifications of all patients with HSIL and controls, as calculated by the model, showed a sensitivity of 0.88 (95% CI = 0.68-0.97) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI = 0.73-0.99). The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value were 0.92 (95% CI = 0.72-0.99) and 0.89 (95% CI = 0.70-0.97), respectively. The Cohen κ coefficient was 0.80. CONCLUSIONS: E-nose can detect distinctive patterns of volatile organic compounds between cervical HSIL patients and controls. Validation of the algorithm in further studies is necessary before possible implementation into daily practice.

Manchester Procedure vs Sacrospinous Hysteropexy for Treatment of Uterine Descent: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In many countries, sacrospinous hysteropexy is the most commonly practiced uterus-preserving technique in women undergoing a first operation for pelvic organ prolapse. However, there are no direct comparisons of outcomes after sacrospinous hysteropexy vs an older technique, the Manchester procedure. Objective: To compare success of sacrospinous hysteropexy vs the Manchester procedure for the surgical treatment of uterine descent. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted in 26 hospitals in the Netherlands among 434 adult patients undergoing a first surgical treatment for uterine descent that did not protrude beyond the hymen. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to undergo sacrospinous hysteropexy (n = 217) or Manchester procedure (n = 217). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite outcome of success, defined as absence of pelvic organ prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment evaluated by a standardized vaginal support quantification system, absence of bothersome bulge symptoms, and absence of prolapse retreatment (pessary or surgery) within 2 years after the operation. The predefined noninferiority margin was 9%. Secondary outcomes were anatomical and patient-reported outcomes, perioperative parameters, and surgery-related complications. Results: Among 393 participants included in the as-randomized analysis (mean age, 61.7 years [SD, 9.1 years]), 151 of 196 (77.0%) in the sacrospinous hysteropexy group and 172 of 197 (87.3%) in the Manchester procedure group achieved the composite outcome of success. Sacrospinous hysteropexy did not meet the noninferiority criterion of -9% for the lower limit of the CI (risk difference, -10.3%; 95% CI, -17.8% to -2.8%; P = .63 for noninferiority). At 2-year follow-up, perioperative outcomes and patient-reported outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Based on the composite outcome of surgical success 2 years after primary uterus-sparing pelvic organ prolapse surgery for uterine descent, these results support a finding that sacrospinous hysteropexy is inferior to the Manchester procedure. Trial Registration: TrialRegister.nl Identifier: NTR 6978.

Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.

BACKGROUND: Given that the number of surgeries for pelvic organ prolapse is expected to increase worldwide, knowledge on risk factors for prolapse recurrence is of importance for developing preventive strategies and shared decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for subjective and objective failure after either sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension over a period of 5 years after surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of the 5-year follow-up of the SAVE-U trial. The SAVE-U trial was conducted in 4 Dutch hospitals. A total of 208 women with uterine prolapse stage ≥2 were randomized to sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension. For the current analysis, available annual 5-year follow-up data of 207 women were analyzed. Without missing values this analysis would have included 1035 measurements in total over the 5-year follow-up. Recurrences were analyzed as "events" using generalized linear mixed models because recurrences of anatomic failure and bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms fluctuated over time. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of failure defined as prolapse beyond the hymen, bothersome bulge symptoms, repeated surgery, or pessary use for recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcome measures were bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms, overall anatomic failure (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage ≥2 in any compartment), apical compartment recurrence (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage ≥2), anterior compartment recurrence (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage ≥2), and posterior compartment recurrence (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage ≥2). RESULTS: For the composite outcome of failure (164 events in 66 different women), statistically significant risk factors were: body mass index (odds ratio, 1.10 [per 1 kg/m2]; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.19; P=.02), smoking (odds ratio, 2.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-7.40; P=.03), and preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point Ba (odds ratio, 1.23 [per 1 cm]; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.50; P=.04). When analyzing each surgical outcome measure separately, body mass index and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point Ba were risk factors for overall anatomic failure (462 events in 147 women; odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.25; P<.01 and odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.30; P=.05, respectively) and anterior compartment recurrence (385 events in 128 women; odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.22; P=.02 and odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.34; P=.02, respectively). Vaginal hysterectomy was a risk factor for posterior compartment recurrence when compared with sacrospinous hysteropexy (93 events in 40 women; odds ratio, 5.21; 95% confidence interval, 2.05-13.27; P<.01). Smoking was a risk factor for bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms (70 events in 41 women; odds ratio, 3.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-9.75; P=.01), and preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage 3 or 4 was significantly protective against bothersome bulge symptoms (odds ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.89; P=.03). CONCLUSION: Body mass index, smoking, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point Ba were statistically significant risk factors for the composite outcome of failure (prolapse beyond the hymen, bothersome bulge symptoms, repeated surgery, or pessary use for recurrent prolapse) in the period of 5 years after surgery.

Risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To update a previously published systematic review and perform a meta-analysis on the risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched. We searched from July 1, 2014 until July 5, 2021. The previous search was from inception until August 4, 2014. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials and cross-sectional and cohort studies conducted in the Western developed countries that reported on multivariable analysis of risk factors for primary prolapse or prolapse recurrence were included. The definition of prolapse was based on anatomic references, and prolapse recurrence was defined as anatomic recurrence after native tissue repair. Studies on prolapse recurrence with a median follow-up of ≥1 year after surgery were included. METHODS: Quality assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data from the previous review and this review were combined into forest plots, and meta-analyses were performed where possible. If the data could not be pooled, "confirmed risk factors" were identified if ≥2 studies reported a significant association in multivariable analysis. RESULTS: After screening, 14 additional studies were selected-8 on the risk factors for primary prolapse and 6 on prolapse recurrence. Combined with the results from the previous review, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing the data of 47,429 women. Not all studies could be pooled because of heterogeneity. Meta-analyses showed that birthweight (n=3, odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.06), age (n=3, odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-1.47), body mass index (n=2, odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.62), and levator defect (n=2, odds ratio, 3.99; 95% confidence interval, 2.57-6.18) are statistically significant risk factors, and cesarean delivery (n=2, pooled odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.20) and smoking (n=3, odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.75) are protective factors for primary prolapse. Parity, vaginal delivery, and levator hiatal area are identified as "confirmed risk factors." For prolapse recurrence, preoperative prolapse stage (n=5, odds ratio, 2.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-3.73) and age (n=2, odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.99-6.08) are statistically significant risk factors. CONCLUSION: Vaginal delivery, parity, birthweight, age, body mass index, levator defect, and levator hiatal area are risk factors, and cesarean delivery and smoking are protective factors for primary prolapse. Preoperative prolapse stage and younger age are risk factors for prolapse recurrence after native tissue surgery.

Practice pattern variation: treatment of pelvic organ prolapse in The Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Great variety in clinical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has been described over the last years. Practice pattern variation (PPV) reflects differences in care that cannot be explained by the underlying condition. We aim to explore whether PPV in management of POP in The Netherlands has changed between 2011 and 2017. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study, using prospective routinely collected benchmark data from LOGEX, a healthcare analytics company (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Data of patients with a diagnosis POP from 50 hospitals (16 teaching and 34 non-teaching hospitals) were collected for the years 2011 and 2017. All treatments were categorized into three groups: conservative treatment, uterus-preserving or uterus-removing surgery. Using meta-analysis, we evaluated whether the proportions of conducted treatments changed over time and estimated the between-center variation (Cochran's Q), reflecting the PPV in 2011 and 2017. This variation was analyzed using F-tests. RESULTS: Compared to 2011, referral for POP in 2017 decreased by 16.2% (-4505 patients), and the percentage of hysterectomies decreased by 33.6% (p < 0.0001). The PPV of POP surgery decreased significantly by 47.2% (p = 0.0137) and of hysterectomies by 41.5% (p = 0.0316). CONCLUSIONS: We found a decline in PPV for POP surgery between 2011 and 2017. Furthermore, the number of surgical interventions decreased, which was mostly due to a decline of hysterectomies. This indicates a shift toward more conservative therapy and uterus preservation. A further reduction of PPV would be beneficial for the quality of health care.

Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ mobility after treatment for uterine descent: differences between surgical procedures.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ mobility is defined as the displacement of pelvic organs between rest and maximal straining. We hypothesized that pelvic organ mobility after vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) might be increased compared with other surgeries for uterine descent, which may contribute to the high occurrence of postoperative cystocele after this surgery. Pelvic organ mobility and the vaginal axes after SSHP are compared with other surgical procedures for uterine descent: vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension (VH) and laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH). METHODS: In this prospective pilot study, 15 women were included (5 for each procedure). Six months postoperatively, POP-Q examination and dynamic MRI were performed and questionnaires were filled out regarding prolapse complaints. Pelvic organ mobility on MRI was defined as vertical displacement of pelvic organs at rest and maximal straining. The displacements and angles were measured using an image registration method. Furthermore, the angle of displacement of cervix/vaginal vault and vaginal axes were assessed. RESULTS: No anatomical recurrences of pelvic organ prolapse were found. No difference in pelvic organ mobility was demonstrated. After VH, a more posterior position of the upper vagina was found compared with SSHP and LSH. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these data, the higher recurrence risk in the anterior compartment after SSHP cannot be explained. Larger sample sizes, studying women with recurrence or de novo cystocele after SSHP or using an upright MRI scanner would be of interest to further assess the relationship between pelvic organ mobility and the occurrence of anterior vaginal wall prolapse.

Long-term safety, objective and subjective outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy without peritoneal closure.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) is performed to support DeLancey's level I in patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Although several studies have been conducted on the safety, objective and subjective outcomes of LSC, the specific effect of retroperitonealisation of mesh is unknown. This study is aimed at analysing the safety, objective and subjective outcomes of the LSC without peritoneal closure of mesh. METHODS: The patients included have undergone an LSC for POP between 2004 and 2014. Retrospectively, a cohort of n = 178 was identified and asked to participate in a follow-up study. Chart research was performed. When informed consent was obtained, questionnaires were sent and the patients underwent a physical examination, including a POP-Q assessment. Each complication was scored by four reviewers for possibly being related to the non-peritonealisation of mesh. RESULTS: The data on the outcome cohorts were complete for safety n = 178, objective n = 124, and subjective n = 61. The Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score is provided in 106 questionnaires. In this study, 77 complications were observed in 49 different patients. The total success rate (no reoperation, no descent beyond the hymen and no bulging symptoms) is 59.0% with a median follow-up (IQR) of 35 months (18-51). Seventy-six patients (71.7%) described their condition as being (much) improved after LSC. CONCLUSIONS: Three serious complications observed during the 178 LSCs were, by full consensus, thought to be possibly related to the non-peritonealisation of mesh. More than 70% of the patients found their condition to be (much) improved after the procedure.

A prospective observational cohort study of the Ajust® single incision sling performed under conscious sedation with local infiltration.

AIMS: To evaluate the adjustable single-incision sling (Ajust®) in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI), when placed under conscious sedation with local infiltration, using the cough test during surgery. METHODS: In this multicenter observational study, 90 women who had moderate to severe SUI, were asked to have the Ajust® procedure performed under sedation with local infiltration with levobupivacain. This allowed for a perioperative cough test to adjust the sling to the urethra till continence was reached. The primary outcome of the study was subjective cure of stress incontinence at 1 year follow up. Secondary objectives were objective and subjective improvement, complications during and after the procedure, and postoperative pain scores. These results were compared with the results of a historical control group of 96 patients who received their Ajust® under general or regional (spinal) anesthesia. RESULTS: At 6 weeks and 12 months, there were no statistical significant differences in the results for subjective cure (83.6% and 71.6% sedation group, 88.4% and 77.2% general/regional anesthesia group), objective cure (96% and 86.9% sedation group, 88.1% and 91.8% general/regional anesthesia group), de novo urgency (10.5% and 6.7% sedation group, 7.1% and 24.1% general/regional anesthesia group) and the patients global impression of improvement (96% and 89.2% sedation group, 91.4% and 84.4% general/regional anesthesia group). CONCLUSION: The performance of a cough test during the placement of an adjustable single-incision sling for the treatment of SUI does not affect the functional outcome, and is therefore not necessary.

Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study).

BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to 40% of parous women which adversely affects the quality of life. During a life time, 20% of all women will undergo an operation. In general the guidelines advise a vaginal operation in case of uterine descent: hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament plication (VH), sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) or a modified Manchester operation (MM). In the last decade, renewed interest in uterus sparing techniques has been observed. Previous studies have shown non-inferiority between SSH and VH. Whether or not SSH and MM are comparable concerning anatomical and functional outcome is still unknown. The practical application of both operations is at least in The Netherlands a known cause of practice pattern variation (PPV). To reveal any difference between both techniques the SAM-study was designed. METHODS: The SAM-study is a randomized controlled multicentre non-inferiority study which compares SSH and MM. Women with symptomatic POP in any stage, uterine descent and POP-Quantification (POP-Q) point D at ≤ minus 1 cm are eligible. The primary outcome is the composite outcome at two years of absence of prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment, the absence of bulge symptoms and absence of reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse. Secondary outcomes are hospital parameters, surgery related morbidity/complications, pain perception, further treatments for prolapse or urinary incontinence, POP-Q anatomy in all compartments, quality-of-life, sexual function, and cost-effectiveness. Follow-up takes place at 6 weeks, 12 and 24 months. Additionally at 12 weeks, 6 and 9 months cost-effectiveness will be assessed. Validated questionnaires will be used and gynaecological examination will be performed. Analysis will be performed following the intention-to-treat and per protocol principle. With a non-inferiority margin of 9% and an expected loss to follow-up of 10%, 424 women will be needed to prove non-inferiority with a confidence interval of 95%. DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the effectiveness and costs of SSH versus MM in women with primary POP. The evidence will show whether the existing PPV is detrimental and a de-implementation process regarding one of the operations is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 6978, http://www.trialregister.nl ). Date of registration: 29 January 2018. Prospectively registered.

Results of an innovative bulking agent in patients with stress urinary incontinence who are not optimal candidates for mid-urethral sling surgery.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of peri-urethral bulking injections (PBI) with an innovative bulking material (PDMS-U) in women with stress-urinary incontinence (SUI) who are not optimal candidates for mid-urethral sling surgery. METHODS: A prospective study was performed in women with SUI who, for several reasons, have a relative contraindication for a mid-urethral sling procedure. These reasons include: (i) recurrent SUI after a prior SUI surgical procedure; (ii) a history of oncologic gynaecological surgery; (iii) a history of neurologic disease resulting in voiding problems; (iv) a maximal flow rate of less than 15 mL per second or; (v) women with a contraindication for surgery with general or regional anaesthesia. All women were treated with PBI consisting of PDMS-U, a bulking agent that polymerizes in situ. The primary outcome was subjective improvement, defined as "a little better" to "very much better" on the PGI-I. Secondary outcomes included objective cure, disease specific quality of life and adverse events. RESULTS: Subjective improvement was reported by 18 (90%) of the 20 included patients. The subjective cure rate was 56% and the objective cure rate was 65%. There was a statistically significant improvement of all domain scores of the UDI-6, IIQ-7, and PISQ-12 at 6 months follow up. Abnormal post voiding residual volume (>150 mL) was the most common adverse event (40%), but persisted in only one patient, based on the patient's preference for a catheter. CONCLUSIONS: PBI with PDMS-U is a viable treatment option in women with a relative contra-indication for mid-urethral sling surgery.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to evaluate the functional outcome after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus open sacrocolpopexy in women with vault prolapse. METHODS: A multicentre randomised controlled trial was carried out at four teaching and two university hospitals in the Netherlands in women with symptomatic vault prolapse requiring surgical treatment. Participants were randomised for laparoscopic or open sacrocolpopexy. Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life measured using the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) questionnaire at 12 months' follow-up. Secondary outcomes included anatomical outcome and perioperative data. We needed 74 participants to show a difference of 10 points on the prolapse domain of the UDI 12 months after surgery (power of 80%, α error 0.05). RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2012, a total of 74 women were randomised. Follow-up after 12 months showed no significant differences in domain scores of the UDI between the two groups. After 12 months, both groups reported a UDI score of 0.0 (IQR: 0-0) for the domain "genital prolapse", which was the primary outcome. There were no significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.93). The number of severe complications was 4 in the laparoscopic group versus 7 in the open abdominal group (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.50-2.27). There was less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay after laparoscopy; 2 (IQR 2-3) versus 4 (IQR 3-5) days, which was statistically different. There was no significant difference in anatomical outcome at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Our trial provides evidence to support a laparoscopic approach when performing sacrocolpopexy, as there was less blood loss and hospital stay was shorter, whereas functional and anatomical outcome were not statistically different.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse, a randomized controlled trial: SALTO-2 trial, study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hysterectomy is one of the most performed surgical procedures during lifetime. Almost 10 % of women who have had a hysterectomy because of prolapse symptoms, will visit a gynaecologist for a surgical correction of a vaginal vault prolapse thereafter. Vaginal vault prolapse can be corrected by many different surgical procedures. A Cochrane review comparing abdominal sacrocolpopexy to vaginal sacrospinous fixation considered the open abdominal procedure as the treatment of first choice for prolapse of the vaginal vault, although operation time and hospital stay is longer. Literature also shows that hospital stay and blood loss are less after a laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared to the abdominal technique. To date, it is unclear which of these techniques leads to the best operative result and the highest patient satisfaction. Prospective trials comparing vaginal sacrospinous fixation and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy are lacking. The aim of this randomized trial is to compare the disease specific quality of life of the vaginal sacrospinous fixation and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy as the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. METHODS: We will perform a multicentre prospective randomized controlled trial. Women with a post-hysterectomy symptomatic, POP-Q stage ≥2, vaginal vault prolapse will be included. Participants will be randomized to the vaginal sacrospinous fixation group or the laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy group. Primary outcome is disease specific quality of life at 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcome will be the effect of the surgical treatment on prolapse related symptoms, sexual functioning, procedure related morbidity, hospital stay, post-operative recovery, anatomical results using the POP-Q classification after one and 5 years follow-up, type and number of re-interventions, costs and cost-effectiveness. Analysis will be performed according to the intention to treat principle and not as a per protocol analysis. With a power of 90% and a level of 0.05, the calculated sample size necessary is 96 patients. Taking into account 10% attrition, a number of 106 patients (53 in each arm) will be included. DISCUSSION: The SALTO-2 trial is a randomized controlled multicentre trial to evaluate whether the laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or vaginal sacrospinous fixation is the first-choice surgical treatment in patients with a stage ≥2 vault prolapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR3977 ; Registered 28 April 2013.

Evaluation of Nickel Allergic Reactions to the Essure Micro Insert: Theoretical Risk or Daily Practice?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether de novo development of nickel sensitization is related to placement of the Essure device, and to evaluate whether the grade of reaction to nickel increased after device placement in patients with a confirmed nickel allergy. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Two nonacademic training hospitals in The Netherlands. PATIENTS: Healthy women of childbearing age desiring permanent sterilization. INTERVENTIONS: At least 72 hours before Essure sterilization, each patient received 2 patches, 1 patch with a nickel solution in 5% petrolatum and 1 control patch. In addition, the patient was asked to complete a questionnaire on allergy-related symptoms. The patch test was scored according to the criteria for contact dermatitis of Devos and Van Der Valk. At 3 months after Essure sterilization, the patch test and the questionnaire were repeated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All 169 patients underwent Essure sterilization and completed the patch test cycle. There were no statistically significant changes in patch test results and allergy-related symptoms after sterilization. Before sterilization, 29% of the patients had a positive patch test and 1.8% also showed a positive reaction to the control patch. Only 20.7% of the patients had a history of allergic reactions to nickel. After sterilization, 29% had a positive patch test and 0.6% also showed a positive reaction to the control patch. Among the patients with a positive patch test before sterilization, the grade of reaction did not increase after sterilization. Moreover, these patients did not exhibit any increase in allergy-related symptoms. Among 4 patients with a previous negative patch test, 2 developed a grade 1 reaction and 2 developed a grade 2 reaction after sterilization. Two of these 4 patients had a history of allergic reactions to nickel before sterilization despite a negative patch test. After sterilization, these 4 patients exhibited no increase in allergy-related symptoms. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant changes in nickel patch test results and allergy-related symptoms after Essure sterilization. Furthermore, among the patients with a positive patch test before Essure sterilization, the grade of reaction did not increase after sterilization. These results indicate that Essure sterilization likely is not related to nickel sensitization.