Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery最新文献

Importance: Voiding diaries can be onerous, we sought to investigate if some women can predict their voided volumes.

Objectives: The objective of this study is to determine the accuracy of estimated voided volumes and characteristics most predictive of accuracy.

Study design: We prospectively collected data on 101 women undergoing urodynamics for lower urinary tract symptoms and/or prolapse at a tertiary care facility. Data collection included postvoid residual volume, urodynamic diagnosis, flow time and rate, and a 1-time measurement of voided volume into a blinded uroflow. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to examine predictors of estimated voided volume (mL).

Results: Mean age was 58.2 years (standard deviation, 12.8 years). The median estimated voided volume and actual voided volume were 240 and 215 mL, respectively. The average percent error was 15% (63% of patients being within a 30% margin of error and 32.7% being within a 20% margin of error). On linear regression analysis, smaller voids of 101 to 200 mL were associated with greater accuracy (R2 = 0.37 P = 0.001) and diagnosis of anxiety was associated with a higher voided volume percent error (P = 0.028). Logistic regression analysis revealed that for every 1 year increase in age, there was a 3% decrease in odds of predicting voiding volume within 30% (odds ratios, 0.97; P = 0.041).

Conclusions: Nearly two-thirds of women estimated their voided volume within 30% of the actual void and one-third of women could predict within 20%. This should be taken into consideration when obtaining patient history, particularly with age and diagnosis of anxiety, and may substantiate use of voiding diaries for accurate measurement in specific populations.

Importance: Many health care providers place concomitant midurethral slings during pelvic organ prolapse repair, yet growing evidence supports staged midurethral sling placement.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare urinary function after transvaginal uterovaginal prolapse repair with and without midurethral sling.

Study design: Secondary analysis of the Study of Uterine Prolapse Procedures Randomized Trial (hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension vs mesh hysteropexy). Our primary outcome was Urinary Distress Inventory score (UDI-6) through 5 years compared between women with and without a concomitant sling within prolapse repair arms. Sling effect was adjusted for select clinical variables and interaction terms (α = .05).

Results: The sling group included 90 women (43 hysteropexy, 47 hysterectomy), and the no-sling group included 93 women (48 hysteropexy, 45 hysterectomy). At baseline, the sling group reported more bothersome stress (66% vs 36%, P < 0.001) and urgency incontinence (69% vs 48%, P = 0.007). For hysteropexy, there were no significant long-term differences in UDI-6 scores or bothersome urine leakage between sling groups. For hysterectomy, women with sling had better UDI-6 scores across time points (adjusted mean difference, -5.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.9 to -0.2); bothersome stress and urgency leakage were less common in the sling group (stress adjusted odds ratio, 0.1 [95% CI, 0.0-0.4]; urge adjusted odds ratio, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.2-1.0]). Treatment for stress incontinence over 5 years was similar in the sling (7.9%) versus no-sling (7.6%) groups.

Conclusions: Five-year urinary outcomes of concomitant midurethral sling may vary by type of transvaginal prolapse surgery, with possible benefit of midurethral sling at the time of vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension but not after mesh hysteropexy.