Postpartum urinary retention: an expert review.

Postpartum urinary retention is a relatively common condition that can have a marked impact on women in the immediate days following childbirth. If left untreated, postpartum urinary retention can lead to repetitive overdistention injury that may damage the detrusor muscle and the parasympathetic nerve fibers within the bladder wall. In rare circumstances, postpartum urinary retention may even lead to bladder rupture, which is a potentially life-threatening yet entirely preventable complication. Early diagnosis and timely intervention are necessary to decrease long-term consequences. There are 3 types of postpartum urinary retention: overt, covert, and persistent. Overt retention is associated with an inability to void, whereas covert retention is associated with incomplete bladder emptying. Persistent urinary retention continues beyond the third postpartum day and can persist for several weeks in rare cases. Recognition of risk factors and prompt diagnosis are important for proper management and prevention of negative sequelae. However, lack of knowledge by providers and patients alike creates barriers to accessing and receiving evidence-based care, and may further delay diagnosis for patients, especially those who experience covert postpartum urinary retention. Nationally accepted definitions and management algorithms for postpartum urinary retention are lacking, and development of such guidelines is essential for both patient care and research design. We propose intrapartum recommendations and a standardized postpartum bladder management protocol that will improve patient outcomes and contribute to the growing body of evidence-based practice in this field.

Same-day Hospital Discharge after Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy in a Gynecologic Oncology Practice: Feasibility, Safety, Predictors of Admission, and Adverse Outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: (1) Determine the feasibility and safety of same-day hospital discharge (SDHD) after minimally invasive hysterectomy (MIH) in a gynecologic oncology practice and (2) detail predictors of immediate postoperative hospital admission and multiple 30-day adverse outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Magee-Womens Hospital. PATIENTS: MIH by a gynecologic oncologist between January 2017 and July 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Clinicopathologic, operative, and medical characteristics, as well as 30-day postoperative complications, emergency department (ED) encounters, and hospital readmissions were extracted. Admitted and SDHD patients were compared using descriptive, chi-square, Fisher's exact, t test, and logistic regression analyses. Univariate and multivariable analyses (MVA) revealed predictors of postoperative hospital admission, 30-day readmission, and a 30-day composite adverse event variable (all-reported postoperative complications, ED encounter, and/or readmission). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1124 patients were identified, of which 77.3% had cancer or precancer; 775 patients (69.0%) underwent SDHD. On MVA, predictors of postoperative admission included older age, distance from hospital, longer procedure length, operative complications, start time after 2 PM, radical hysterectomy, minilaparotomy, adhesiolysis, cardiac disease, cerebrovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, diabetes, and neurologic disorders (p <.05). Moreover, 30-day adverse outcomes were rare (complication 8.7% National Surgical Quality Improvement Program/11.9% all-reported; ED encounter 5.0%; readmission 3.6%). SDHD patients had fewer all-reported complications (10.3% vs 15.5%, p = .01), no difference in ED encounters (4.6% vs 5.7%, p = .44), and fewer observed readmissions (2.8% vs 5.2%, p = .05). Predictors of readmission were identified on univariate; MVA was not feasible given the low number of events. Longer procedure length and cardiac and obstructive pulmonary disease were predictors of the composite adverse event variable (p <.05). CONCLUSION: SDHD is feasible and safe after MIH within a representative gynecologic oncology practice. Clinicopathologic, medical, and surgical predictors of multiple adverse outcomes were comprehensively described. By identifying patients at high risk of postoperative adverse events, we can direct SDHD selection in the absence of standardized institutional and/or national consensus guidelines and identify patients for prehabilitation and increased perioperative support.

Risk-reducing Bilateral Salpingo-oophorectomy: Assessing the Incidence of Occult Ovarian Cancer and Surgeon Adherence to Recommended Practices.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the incidence of ovarian cancer diagnosed at the time of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in a large cohort of patients with a BRCA mutation. In addition, we aimed to determine the adherence to the recommended practices for performing a risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy as described by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. We sought to determine if adherence differed by the type of training (i.e., gynecologic oncologists vs benign gynecologists). DESIGN: Descriptive, retrospective analysis. SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: Two hundred sixty-nine patients with a known BRCA mutation. INTERVENTIONS: Prophylactic risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy performed either by a gynecologic oncologist or a benign gynecologist between July 2007 and September 2018. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 269 patients who underwent risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomies, 220 procedures were performed by gynecologic oncologists, and 49 were performed by benign gynecologists. Washings were not performed in 5% of the procedures performed by gynecologic oncologists and 37% of the procedures performed by benign gynecologists (p <.001). Complete serial sectioning of the adnexa was not performed in 12% of the procedures performed by oncologists, and 13% of the procedures performed by benign gynecologists (p = .714). There were 8 cases (2.9%) of tubal or ovarian cancer diagnosed within this cohort. Of these cases, only 3 (1.1%) were diagnosed at the time of surgery and met the criteria for conversion to a staging procedure. CONCLUSION: Because the incidence of ovarian cancer diagnosis at the time of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is low and is often not diagnosed at the time of surgery owing to the presence of only microscopic disease, it may not be necessary for gynecologic oncologists to exclusively perform these procedures. However, this study also revealed that when this procedure is performed by benign gynecologic surgeons, some of the recommended practices are not routinely followed. If general gynecologic surgeons are to routinely perform risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomies, it is important to promote better adherence to these practices.