Search

In this study, the rates of reoperation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in women who underwent a mid-urethral sling (MUS) with or without concurrent colporrhaphy were evaluated. An academic faculty practice consortium database was used to identify a cohort of patients treated surgically for SUI with or without concurrent POP repair (apical, anterior, posterior, or a combination of the three) with or without hysterectomy between 2009 and 2011. A total of 20,484 patients matched the criteria. Of patients who underwent a MUS, 7.2% underwent secondary surgery, with a higher rate of 8.6% associated with those who underwent concurrent prolapse repair (Apical repair HR 1.84, p  < .01; Anterior compartment repair HR 1.47, p  < .01). Concurrent hysterectomy was associated with a lower hazard of secondary prolapse surgery (HR 0.48; p < .01 ) if the initial surgery involved a complete POP repair. Prolapse mesh repair resulted in a higher hazard of additional surgery (HR 1.43, p  < .01). Medicaid insurance was also associated with an increased hazard ratio compared to commercial insurance for secondary surgery (HR 1.32, p  < .01). For women undergoing MUS with complete prolapse repair, concurrent hysterectomy is associated with lower secondary surgery rates. Concurrent prolapse repair with mesh is associated with higher secondary surgery rates. Synopsis: For women undergoing MUS (mid-urethral sling) with complete prolapse repair, concurrent hysterectomy is associated with lower secondary surgery rates. Concurrent prolapse repair with mesh is associated with higher secondary surgery rates.Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) can present at the same time and negatively impact patients' quality of life. There is little data regarding reoperation rates for patients who undergo both MUS and colporrhaphy in one setting. What do the results of this study add? This study found that patients who undergo concurrent MUS (mid-urethral sling) and complete POP repair with the addition of hysterectomy had a lower risk of secondary surgery. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our data can be used by surgeons to counsel patients on the risks of re-operation for SUI for those who would like to undergo concurrent POP repair with or without hysterectomy.

Objectives: To evaluate an alternative to clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) for individuals with neurogenic bladder for its effects on independence, privacy, and convenience. This prospective cohort study provides an initial assessment of quality of life, safety, and efficacy of closed diurnal indwelling catheterization (CDIC)., Materials and Methods: Individuals with spinal cord disorders using CIC were prospectively screened at multidisciplinary clinic appointments. During the 24-week intervention, a foley was placed each morning and capped between scheduled bladder drainage each 3-4 hours. After a maximum of 8 hours of CDIC use, CIC was resumed. Quality of life outcome measures (the Short Form Health Survey, King's Health Questionnaire, and Pediatric Quality of Life InventoryTM (PedsQL) questionnaires), clinic evaluations, labs, imaging, and urodynamics were obtained at specified interval visits planned after 4-, 12-, and 24 weeks of study participation and compared to baseline., Results: A total of 11 subjects enrolled; 8 completed the 24-week intervention. No significant difference with CDIC was observed in the Short Form Health Survey or PedsQL summary scores as compared to baseline. For the King's Health Questionnaire, physical limitations secondary to bladder function decreased significantly from baseline to the 4-week and 12-week (P = .02) but not 24-week visits. All 8 subjects who completed the 24-week intervention requested continued use. Early discontinuation occurred in 3 male participants due to urethral trauma (1) and incontinence (2). No increase in bacteriuria, urinary tract infections, or renal anatomic changes was observed., Conclusion: This prospective study demonstrates that CDIC may be safe and effective for short-term use. This alternative to CIC for scheduled daytime bladder drainage for neurogenic bladder warrants further consideration., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: There is a lack of data describing the current state of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) procedures in academic centers. Urologists, gynecologists, and urogynecologists perform these operations, but the relative volume each group accounts for is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the distribution of cases in academic centers between specialties and associated patient characteristics., Methods: A hospital consortium database was used to identify patients treated surgically for SUI between 2009 and 2014. Patient and surgeon variables were evaluated. Patient variables (age, region, insurance, race) and surgeon volume were analyzed. Sub-analysis was conducted to determine concomitant prolapse repairs., Results: Of the 50,315 stress urinary incontinence procedures performed, 22% were performed by urologists. Overall volume dropped 39% and mean surgeon volumes for all three groups decreased with time. Average median volume for urogynecologists (29/year) differed from both urologists (3/year) and non-urogynecologists (2/year). There was a significant difference in rate of concomitant prolapse repairs performed by urogynecologists (56%), gynecologists (54%), and urologists (26%)., Conclusions: These data portray the changing pattern of SUI procedure practice in academic centers. Academic urologists are performing less than 25% of SUI procedures, with an overall decline in number of procedures across all specialties. Urogynecologists and gynecologists are performing a significantly higher proportion of concomitant prolapse repairs. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:394-398, 2017. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)