Association of Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Status With Prolapse Management Decision.

IMPORTANCE: This study identifies how neighborhood-level socioeconomic status (SES) may affect patients' treatment decisions for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association of neighborhood-level SES with the decision of surgical versus conservative POP management. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients newly diagnosed with POP at a tertiary medical center between 2015 and 2021. Patients lost to follow-up or poor surgical candidates were excluded. Patient characteristics, demographics, and treatment selection were abstracted from the electronic health record. Conservative management was defined as expectant, pessary, and/or pelvic floor physical therapy. Five-digit zip codes were linked to the Area Deprivation Index and used as a surrogate for neighborhood-level SES. Area Deprivation Indices were dichotomized at or below the sample median (less disadvantaged area) and above the sample median (more disadvantaged area). Logistic regression models estimated the odds of choosing surgical versus conservative management as a function of the Area Deprivation Index. RESULTS: A total of 459 patients met the eligibility criteria (non-Hispanic White, 88.2%). The median age was 63 years (interquartile range, 52-70 years), and the majority had stage 2 POP (65.7%). Of all patients, 59.3% had Medicare/Medicaid, 39.9% were privately insured, and 0.9% were uninsured. Furthermore, 74.7% selected surgical management, and 25.3% chose conservative management. Increasing age and higher Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System stage were significantly associated with selecting surgery (P = 0.01). Women residing in a more disadvantaged area had a 67% increased odds of choosing surgical over conservative management (adjusted odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.64) after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, body mass index, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System stage. CONCLUSIONS: Residing in a more disadvantaged zip code was associated with 67% increased odds of choosing surgical versus conservative POP management.

Outcomes of a single trigone-only vs. 20 trigone-sparing injections of OnabotulinumtoxinA for refractory overactive bladder (OAB).

PURPOSE: To compare the safety and durability of a single intravesical trigonal-only versus 20 trigone-sparing injections of OnabotulinumtoxinA (BTA) for refractory OAB. METHODS: A chart review of all idiopathic OAB patients treated with BTA from January 2016 to December 2018 was performed. Outcomes measures included: inter-injection interval, post-void residual (PVR), urinary tract infections (UTI), urinary retention requiring catheterization, and procedure time (min). Statistical analyses were performed using independent sample t-tests. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable for the two groups, data on 69 treatments (19 patients trigone-only) were compared to 105 treatments (26 patients trigone-sparing). There were no differences in the inter-injection intervals or rates of UTI. The trigone-only group exhibited a lower mean PVR (113 ml vs 160 ml, p < 0.02), lower proportion with PVR > 150 ml (23% vs. 39%, p < 0.03), lower rate of urinary retention (5.3% vs. 17.4%, p < 0.02), and shorter procedure time (4.3 min vs. 5.7 min, p < 0.01). There were no cases of vesico-ureteral reflux. CONCLUSION: While interpretation remains speculative, the results of this observational study suggest that a single trigone-only injection appears to be as safe and durable as multiple trigone-sparing injections but maybe quicker to perform and appears to have a lower impact on voiding function. Larger series and adequately powered prospective randomized clinical trials are warranted to validate the findings of this pilot study.