Retention of a Foreign Body in the Vagina of an Adult for 13 Years: A Case Report.

Cases in which foreign bodies have been inserted into the vagina predominately occur in the pediatric population. This report presents the case of an adult woman with a retained foreign body for 13 years. A duplicated ureter suggestive of a Mullerian anomaly was incidentally identified on intraoperative cystoscopy. Mullerian anomalies may be associated with complex patient presentations and are associated with reproductive implications that should be discussed based on patient-specific characteristics.

Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: staged management of surgical services for gynecology and obstetrics.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic warrants an unprecedented global healthcare response requiring maintenance of existing hospital-based services while simultaneously preparing for high-acuity care for infected and sick individuals. Hospitals must protect patients and the diverse healthcare workforce by conserving personal protective equipment and redeployment of facility resources. While each hospital or health system must evaluate their own capabilities and surge capacity, we present principles of management of surgical services during a health emergency and provide specific guidance to help with decision making. We review the limited evidence from past hospital and community responses to various health emergencies and focus on systematic methods for adjusting surgical services to create capacity, addressing the specific risks of coronavirus disease 2019. Successful strategies for tiered reduction of surgical cases involve multidisciplinary engagement of the entire healthcare system and use of a structured risk-assessment categorization scheme that can be applied across the institution. Our institution developed and operationalized this approach over 3 working days, indicating that immediate implementation is feasible in response to an unforeseen healthcare emergency.

Patients' Knowledge of and Attitude Toward Robotic Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

OBJECTIVES: Robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has increased, along with marketing and media coverage. It is unknown whether this exposure influences patients' opinions on POP repair. This study describes the preference for and knowledge of robotic surgery in women with POP. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey of new patients presenting with POP at 7 academic sites. Subjects had no prior surgical counseling. A self-administered questionnaire was designed to investigate robotic surgery knowledge, preference, and exposure. Subjects expressed their preferred route of POP repair (robotic, vaginal, abdominal, laparoscopic, or no preference). Knowledge was determined by the number of correctly answered questions (range, 0-7). Perception of robotic surgery was compared with other surgical routes. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six subjects were included. Most had no surgical preference (66.3%), whereas 27.3% preferred nonrobotic and 6.4% preferred robotic routes. The mean knowledge score was 2.3 (SD, 1.7). Women preferring robotic surgery were more likely to view it as faster than laparoscopic surgery (P < 0.001). These same subjects did not perceive any advantages for robotic surgery related to blood loss, pain, and organ injury (P > 0.05). Most reported no prior exposure to robotic surgery information (56.2%) or advertisements (65.2%). Those with prior exposure most frequently obtained information via the Internet and encountered hospital advertisements. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of women with POP reported no preference for robotic approach to POP surgery. Knowledge about robotic surgery was low, even among subjects who expressed preference. Comprehensive counseling may help patients make informed decisions even when surgical preferences exist.

Design and Early Experience With a Real-World Surgical Registry.

OBJECTIVES: We describe the rationale, design, and methods and 6-year experience with a real-world surgical registry for female pelvic reconstructive and incontinence procedures and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: The primary goal of creating this registry was to establish the feasibility of prospective data capture for all urogynecologic procedures. Data captured included baseline demographics, surgical procedures, perioperative complications, and subjective and objective findings up to 36 months after surgery. RESULTS: The Pelvic Reconstruction and Incontinence Surgery ± Mesh Registry was developed over 3 years to include 194 unique variables for prospective data capture. The registry was implemented in December 2010, and data from 924 separate case events from a single surgeon were recorded, comprising 100% surgical case capture. Cases included a variety of procedures representing a comprehensive urogynecology practice on 804 unique patients. Patients who were asked to participate in long-term follow-up (n = 299) returned with attendance of 96% at 6 weeks, 64% at 6 months, 51% at 12 months, 39% at 24 months, and 22% at 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: The Pelvic Reconstruction and Incontinence Surgery ± Mesh Registry effectively captured all urogynecologic procedures for the purpose of quality improvement. This real-world tool demonstrates that 100% case capture is feasible and provides valuable information for the highly motivated surgeon, although adequate long-term follow-up is limited. Additional research is needed to better understand the role of surgical registries for quality improvement and development of patient-centered strategies to increase long-term follow-up.

Identifying Gaps and Inconsistencies in Urogynecologic Surgical Training of Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the expectations of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ObGyn) residency and Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) fellowship program directors (FPDs) for the independent performance of urogynecologic procedures during residency and to compare these expectations with the Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CREOG) educational objectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two parallel, anonymous surveys were distributed simultaneously to all directors of accredited ObGyn residency and FPMRS fellowship programs in the United States. Respondents provided their own professional and program demographic information and indicated whether they expected their residents to independently perform 27 selected urogynecologic procedures. RESULTS: Among residency program directors (RPDs) and FPDs, the online survey response rate was 24.8% (n = 59) and 51.9% (n = 27), respectively. More RPDs expected residents to perform prolapse procedures with mesh, including laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, all apical suspensions, mesh excisions, and cystotomy repairs, than FPDs. In addition, RPDs expected mastery of most urogynecologic procedures by the Post Graduate Year 3 level, whereas most FPDs did not expect independent performance of these procedures during residency at all. There were notable differences between RPDs' expectations and CREOG objectives regarding several surgical procedures. Whereas CREOG recommends independent performance of anterior and posterior repair, vaginal suspension, vaginal hysterectomy, and transobturator slings, a significant number of RPDs did not report expecting mastery of these procedures during residency. Approximately 30% of RPDs expected residents to perform open sacrocolpopexy and vesicovaginal fistula repair, whereas CREOG recommends only the understanding of these, without procedural mastery. CONCLUSIONS: Although community needs vary by region and setting, CREOG objectives serve as the standard for resident surgical education. This study highlights the discordance between these objectives and ObGyn RDPs' reported expectations for resident performance as well as those held by FPMRS FPDs, the outcome of which reflects a misalignment in graduate medical education between RPDs and FPDs, thus hindering a clear standard for resident surgical competencies.

Registries as Tools for Clinical Excellence and the Development of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry.

Surgical device innovation has been less regulated than drug development, allowing integration of unproven techniques and materials into standard practice. Successful device registries gather information on patient outcomes and can provide postmarket surveillance of new technologies and allow comparison with currently established treatments or devices. The Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry was developed in collaboration with the Food and Drug Administration, device manufacturers, and other stakeholders to serve as a platform for industry-sponsored postmarket device surveillance, investigator-initiated research, and quality and effectiveness benchmarking, all designed to improve the care of women with pelvic floor disorders.

The Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry: Purpose and Development.

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common problem that negatively impacts women's quality of life. A variety of surgeries exist for POP treatment, including procedures performed with and without mesh augmentation. The growing use of mesh in prolapse surgeries in the 2000s was associated with increasing reports of complications, resulting in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Safety Notifications, and in 2012, the FDA ordered transvaginal mesh manufacturers to conduct prospective studies to evaluate longer-term outcomes. These requirements provided incentives and an environment conducive to collaboration. American Urogynecologic Society leaders collaborated with device manufacturers, the FDA, and other professional organizations to establish the Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry (PFDR), a collection of interrelated registries, which could meet manufacturers' needs but also allow surgeons to track individual and aggregate outcomes for quality improvement. The PFDR was developed and launched by American Urogynecologic Society with objectives of (1) collecting, storing, and analyzing clinical data related to POP treatment; (2) establishing common data elements and quality metrics; and (3) providing a framework for external stakeholders to conduct POP research. The PFDR includes industry-sponsored studies, as well as 2 options for volunteer registry participation, the PFDR-Quality Improvement and PFDR-Research. The PFDR promotes quality improvement and national benchmarking and will provide real-world comparative safety and effectiveness data for prolapse surgeries. The PFDR can serve as a model for collaboration between medical practitioners, researchers, industry, and federal agencies and may allow progress toward our similar goal of high-quality surgical care of women with prolapse.

Anatomic outcomes of vaginal mesh procedure (Prolift) compared with uterosacral ligament suspension and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a Fellows' Pelvic Research Network study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare apical support anatomic outcomes following vaginal mesh procedure (VMP) (Prolift) to uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) and abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter, retrospective chart review compared apical anatomic success (stage 0 or 1 based on point C or D of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification), level of vaginal apex (point C or D) 3-6 months after prolapse repair at 10 US centers between 2004 and 2007. RESULTS: VMP, USLS, and ASC were performed for 206, 231, and 305 subjects respectively. There was no difference in apical success after VMP (98.8%) compared with USLS (99.1%) or ASC (99.3%) (both P = 1.00) 3-6 months after surgery. The average elevation of the vaginal apex was lower after VMP (-6.9 cm) than USLS (-8.05 cm) and ASC (-8.5 cm) (both P < .001) CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing VMP have similar apical success compared with USLS and ASC despite lower vaginal apex 3-6 month after surgery.