Prolapse surgery with or without incontinence procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of postoperative stress urinary incontinence (POSUI) prolapse repair might be combined with incontinence surgery. OBJECTIVES: Compare efficacy and safety of prolapse surgery with and without incontinence surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: Including our earlier review a systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the Register of Current Controlled Trials was performed from 1995 to 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing prolapse surgery with a midurethral sling (MUS) or Burch colposuspension. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers selected eligible articles and extracted data. Stress urinary outcomes were pooled for preoperative SUI. Urgency incontinence and adverse events were pooled for incontinence procedure. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials were included. Women with preoperative SUI symptoms or occult SUI had a lower risk to undergo subsequent incontinence surgery for POSUI after vaginal prolapse surgery with a MUS than after prolapse surgery only: 0 versus 40% [relative risk (RR) 0.0; 95% CI 0.0-0.2] and 1 versus 15% (RR 0.1; 95% CI 0.0-0.6), respectively. These differences were not significant in continent women not tested for occult SUI or without occult SUI. Serious adverse events were more frequent after vaginal prolapse repair with MUS (14 versus 8%; RR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7), but not after sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension. Combination surgery did not increase the risk of overactive bladder symptoms, urgency incontinence and surgery for voiding dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal prolapse repair with MUS reduced the risk of postoperative SUI in women with preoperative SUI symptoms or occult SUI, but serious adverse events were more frequent. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Less stress incontinence after vaginal prolapse repair with sling, but more adverse events.

[Skin-to-skin caesarean section: a hype or better patient care?] / Huid-op-huidsectio: hype of betere patiëntenzorg?

A caesarean section (CS) is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the world, for which there are minimal variations in the surgical approach. During the last few years the "skin-to-skin" CS, also coined "natural" or "gentle" CS, is on the rise; parental participation, slow delivery and direct skin-to-skin contact are important aspects. Most Dutch hospitals offer some form of "skin-to-skin" CS but there are local differences in availability and performance of the procedure. Since 2011, the standard procedure in the Martini Hospital in Groningen is the "skin-to-skin" CS (for both elective and emergency CS, 24/7). We describe our method and share our retrospective data, and demonstrate that this procedure does not result in more complications for mother or baby.

MisoREST: surgical versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is curettage more effective than expectant management in case of an incomplete evacuation after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage? SUMMARY ANSWER: Curettage leads to a higher chance of complete evacuation but expectant management is successful in at least 76% of women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In 5-50% of the women treated with misoprostol, there is a suspicion of incomplete evacuation of the uterus on sonography. Although these women generally have minor symptoms, such a finding often leads to additional curettage. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: From June 2012 until July 2014, we conducted a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT). Women who had had primary misoprostol treatment for miscarriage with sonographic evidence of incomplete evacuation of the uterus were randomly allocated to either curettage or expectant management (1:1), using a web-based application. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included 59 women in 27 hospitals; 30 were allocated to curettage and 29 were allocated to expectant management. A successful outcome was defined as sonographic finding of an empty uterus 6 weeks after randomization. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable. Empty uterus on sonography or uneventful clinical follow-up was seen in 29/30 women (97%) allocated to curettage compared with 22/29 women (76%) allocated to expectant management (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.03-1.6) with complication rates of 10% versus 10%, respectively (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.21-4.4). In the group allocated to curettage, no woman required re-curettage, while two women (6.7%) underwent hysteroscopy (for other or unknown reasons). In the women allocated to expectant management, curettage was performed in four women (13.8%) and three women (10.3%) underwent hysteroscopy. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Due to a strong patient preference, mainly for expectant management, the targeted sample size could not be included and the trial was stopped prematurely. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In women suspected of incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol, curettage is more effective than expectant management. However, expectant management is equally safe and prevents curettage for most of the women. This finding could further restrain the use of curettage in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 80-82310-97-12066. There were no conflicts of interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register NTR3310, http://www.trialregister.nl TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 27 February 2012. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 12 June 2012.

Transvaginal prolapse repair with or without the addition of a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare transvaginal prolapse repair combined with midurethral sling (MUS) versus prolapse repair only. DESIGN: Multi-centre randomised trial. SETTING: Fourteen teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Women with symptomatic stage two or greater pelvic organ prolapse (POP), and subjective or objective stress urinary incontinence (SUI) without prolapse reduction. METHODS: Women were randomly assigned to undergo vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Analysis was according to intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome at 12 months' follow-up was the absence of urinary incontinence (UI) assessed with the Urogenital Distress Inventory and treatment for SUI or overactive bladder. Secondary outcomes included complications. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four women were analysed at 12 months' follow-up (63 in MUS and 71 in control group). More women in the MUS group reported the absence of UI and SUI; respectively 62% versus 30% UI (relative risk [RR] 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.15) and 78% versus 39% SUI (RR 1.97; 95% CI 1.44-2.71). Fewer women underwent treatment for postoperative SUI in the MUS group (10% versus 37%; RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.11-0.59). In the control group, 12 women (17%) underwent MUS after prolapse surgery versus none in the MUS group. Severe complications were more common in the MUS group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16% versus 6%; RR 2.82; 95% CI 0.93-8.54). CONCLUSIONS: Women with prolapse and co-existing SUI are less likely to have SUI after transvaginal prolapse repair with MUS compared with prolapse repair only. However, only 17% of the women undergoing POP surgery needed additional MUS. A well-informed decision balancing risks and benefits of both strategies should be tailored to individual women.

Prolapse surgery with or without stress incontinence surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVES: The combination of prolapse surgery with an incontinence procedure can reduce the incidence of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after surgery, but may increase adverse events. We compared the effectiveness and safety of prolapse surgery versus combined prolapse and incontinence surgery in women with pelvic organ prolapse. DESIGN AND SETTING: Pubmed, EMBASE, DARE, the Cochrane Library and the register of Current Controlled Trials were searched for randomised trials (restricted to Burch colposuspension and midurethral sling as incontinence procedure) from 1995 to 2013 limited to the English literature. METHODS: Two reviewers selected eligible articles and extracted the data. Pooling for SUI was based on three patient groups: (1) women with coexisting SUI; (2) women asymptomatic for SUI; and (3) women with occult SUI. For adverse events, pooling was based on incontinence procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was SUI. The secondary outcomes were treatment for SUI, bladder storage symptoms, obstructive voiding and adverse events. RESULTS: Seven trials were included. Pooling for women with coexisting SUI was possible for objective SUI with two studies and showed no difference. Statistical (I(2) = 95%) and clinical heterogeneity was, however, high. The largest study showed a lower incidence of persisting SUI (5% versus 23%) and treatment for this (0% versus 57%) in women who underwent prolapse repair with a midurethral sling. The second study did not find a difference in women undergoing a sacrocolpopexy with or without Burch colposuspension. In asymptomatic women, combination surgery resulted in a lower incidence of de novo subjective SUI (two studies; 24% versus 41%; relative risk [RR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3-0.9; I(2) = 36%) and the need for subsequent anti-incontinence surgery (three studies; 2% versus 7%; RR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8; I(2) = 13%). For the outcome objective SUI, pooling was possible for five studies, but statistical heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 82%) and the difference was not statistically significant. In the subgroup of women with occult stress incontinence, we found a lower incidence of objective SUI after combination surgery (two studies; 22% versus 52%; RR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8; I(2) = 32%). There were no differences in bladder storage symptoms, urgency incontinence or long-term obstructive voiding symptoms. Adverse events (two studies; 15% versus 10%; RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.5; I(2) = 0%) and prolonged catheterisation (three studies; 6% versus 1%; RR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.5-13.3; I(2) = 0%) were more frequent after vaginal prolapse repair with a midurethral sling. CONCLUSIONS: Combination surgery reduces the risk of postoperative stress incontinence, but short-term voiding difficulties and adverse events were more frequent after combination surgery with a midurethral sling.

[Diagnosis image (258). A women with a 'bullet' in the abdomen]. / Diagnose in beeld (258). Een vrouw met een 'kogel' in het abdomen.

A 48-year-old woman had 17 years after hysterosalpingography a collection of contrast fluid, suggesting a bullet, in the abdomen.

[The value of ultrasonography consultation by second-line gynecological caregivers to midwives and family practitioners]. / De waarde van een echoscopiespreekuur door verloskundige hulpverleners uit de tweede lijn voor verloskundigen en huisartsen.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of a consulting hour for ultrasound examination for general practitioners and midwives, performed by gynaecologists. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective. METHOD: Indications for ultrasound examination, as determined by general practitioners and midwives, were compared with the ultrasound findings. The consequences of the ultrasound examination were analysed. RESULTS: An abnormal finding was obtained in 23.5% of 1801 women examined by ultrasound. Correction of estimated gestational age took place in 47%. Abnormal findings were present in 64% of women with first trimester bleeding. In 5.6% a further consultation of a gynaecologist was necessary. CONCLUSION: A consulting hour for ultrasound examination is a useful supplementary diagnostic tool for general practitioners and midwives.