AUGS/IUGA 2014

WASHINGTON – Bowel preparation for vaginal reconstructive surgery does not affect postoperative bowel function and bowel symptoms one way or the other, according to a secondary analysis of a single-blind randomized trial examining various effects of mechanical bowel preparation.

In a primary analysis published earlier this year, investigators found no benefit to mechanical bowel preparation with regard to the operative field quality. They also found that patients who were randomized not to receive bowel preparation were more satisfied and had fewer abdominal symptoms than those who received the intervention – a clear-liquid diet and enemas (Obstet. Gynecol. 2014;123:232-8).

The new analysis, reported at the scientific meetings of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association, looked more closely at postoperative bowel habits after vaginal reconstructive surgery.

"As surgical intervention for pelvic organ prolapse increases, so does our need for knowledge of [best] perioperative management practices," said Dr. Alicia C. Ballard of the division of urogynecology and pelvic reconstructive surgery at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where the study was conducted.

"Concerns about painful defecation and GI symptoms such as nausea and vomiting are significant concerns for women undergoing surgery," she said.

Women may be predisposed to postsurgical constipation as a result of preoperative bowel preparation (including diet), the lasting effects of anesthesia, the use of narcotics, and the surgery itself. Prior research has shown, moreover, that constipation and incomplete bowel evacuation are not uncommon preoperatively in women with pelvic organ prolapse, she noted.

The study randomized 150 women scheduled to undergo vaginal prolapse surgery with, at a minimum, a planned apical suspension and posterior compartment repair. Surgeries included other prolapse and incontinence procedures.

Women randomized to the bowel preparation group were instructed to have a clear-liquid diet and to self-administer two saline enemas in the late afternoon of the day before surgery.

Those who were randomized to receive no intervention were allowed to have a regular diet. Women in both groups were instructed to eat nothing after midnight on the day of surgery.

All study participants were instructed to complete a bowel diary for 7 days preoperatively and 14 days postoperatively. Those who completed the preoperative diary and 10 of 14 days of the postoperative diary were included in the analysis.

Of the 150 women randomized at the preoperative visit in a 1:1 fashion, 5 withdrew from the study or had surgery canceled, and 121 completed the bowel diary.

The mean time to first bowel movement after surgery was similar in the two groups: 3.3 days in the bowel prep group and 3.2 days in the control group. The groups were also similar with regard to pain, fecal urgency, and stool transit times on the day of the first postoperative bowel movement. The use of antiemetics postoperatively was similar as well (48% and 55% in the bowel prep and no-prep groups, respectively.)

Most of the 121 women – across both groups – used at least one laxative postoperatively, mainly osmotic laxatives. Women who had not received bowel preparation were more likely, however, to report daily fiber use.

"Bowel preparation ... doesn’t appear to affect the return of bowel function and other bowel symptoms postoperatively," Dr. Ballard said. Moreover, "the lack of bowel preparation doesn’t seem to impact painful defecation symptoms, and most women use some type of laxative."

The study’s exclusion criteria included colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, a history of bowel resection, neurological disorders, and symptoms of colonic inertia (fewer than three bowel movements per week). The decision to exclude patients with significant preoperative constipation was made in order to "decrease the risk of bowel dysfunction and was important for our primary outcomes," Dr. Ballard explained. "But there actually were not that many women excluded."

Dr. Ballard reported that she had no disclosures. Two of her five coinvestigators reported various relationships with St. Jude Medical and Pelvalon.

WASHINGTON – Bowel preparation for vaginal reconstructive surgery does not affect postoperative bowel function and bowel symptoms one way or the other, according to a secondary analysis of a single-blind randomized trial examining various effects of mechanical bowel preparation.

In a primary analysis published earlier this year, investigators found no benefit to mechanical bowel preparation with regard to the operative field quality. They also found that patients who were randomized not to receive bowel preparation were more satisfied and had fewer abdominal symptoms than those who received the intervention – a clear-liquid diet and enemas (Obstet. Gynecol. 2014;123:232-8).

The new analysis, reported at the scientific meetings of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association, looked more closely at postoperative bowel habits after vaginal reconstructive surgery.

"As surgical intervention for pelvic organ prolapse increases, so does our need for knowledge of [best] perioperative management practices," said Dr. Alicia C. Ballard of the division of urogynecology and pelvic reconstructive surgery at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where the study was conducted.

"Concerns about painful defecation and GI symptoms such as nausea and vomiting are significant concerns for women undergoing surgery," she said.

Women may be predisposed to postsurgical constipation as a result of preoperative bowel preparation (including diet), the lasting effects of anesthesia, the use of narcotics, and the surgery itself. Prior research has shown, moreover, that constipation and incomplete bowel evacuation are not uncommon preoperatively in women with pelvic organ prolapse, she noted.

The study randomized 150 women scheduled to undergo vaginal prolapse surgery with, at a minimum, a planned apical suspension and posterior compartment repair. Surgeries included other prolapse and incontinence procedures.

Women randomized to the bowel preparation group were instructed to have a clear-liquid diet and to self-administer two saline enemas in the late afternoon of the day before surgery.

Those who were randomized to receive no intervention were allowed to have a regular diet. Women in both groups were instructed to eat nothing after midnight on the day of surgery.

All study participants were instructed to complete a bowel diary for 7 days preoperatively and 14 days postoperatively. Those who completed the preoperative diary and 10 of 14 days of the postoperative diary were included in the analysis.

Of the 150 women randomized at the preoperative visit in a 1:1 fashion, 5 withdrew from the study or had surgery canceled, and 121 completed the bowel diary.

The mean time to first bowel movement after surgery was similar in the two groups: 3.3 days in the bowel prep group and 3.2 days in the control group. The groups were also similar with regard to pain, fecal urgency, and stool transit times on the day of the first postoperative bowel movement. The use of antiemetics postoperatively was similar as well (48% and 55% in the bowel prep and no-prep groups, respectively.)

Most of the 121 women – across both groups – used at least one laxative postoperatively, mainly osmotic laxatives. Women who had not received bowel preparation were more likely, however, to report daily fiber use.

"Bowel preparation ... doesn’t appear to affect the return of bowel function and other bowel symptoms postoperatively," Dr. Ballard said. Moreover, "the lack of bowel preparation doesn’t seem to impact painful defecation symptoms, and most women use some type of laxative."

The study’s exclusion criteria included colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, a history of bowel resection, neurological disorders, and symptoms of colonic inertia (fewer than three bowel movements per week). The decision to exclude patients with significant preoperative constipation was made in order to "decrease the risk of bowel dysfunction and was important for our primary outcomes," Dr. Ballard explained. "But there actually were not that many women excluded."

Dr. Ballard reported that she had no disclosures. Two of her five coinvestigators reported various relationships with St. Jude Medical and Pelvalon.

WASHINGTON – Bowel preparation for vaginal reconstructive surgery does not affect postoperative bowel function and bowel symptoms one way or the other, according to a secondary analysis of a single-blind randomized trial examining various effects of mechanical bowel preparation.

In a primary analysis published earlier this year, investigators found no benefit to mechanical bowel preparation with regard to the operative field quality. They also found that patients who were randomized not to receive bowel preparation were more satisfied and had fewer abdominal symptoms than those who received the intervention – a clear-liquid diet and enemas (Obstet. Gynecol. 2014;123:232-8).

The new analysis, reported at the scientific meetings of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association, looked more closely at postoperative bowel habits after vaginal reconstructive surgery.

"As surgical intervention for pelvic organ prolapse increases, so does our need for knowledge of [best] perioperative management practices," said Dr. Alicia C. Ballard of the division of urogynecology and pelvic reconstructive surgery at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where the study was conducted.

"Concerns about painful defecation and GI symptoms such as nausea and vomiting are significant concerns for women undergoing surgery," she said.

Women may be predisposed to postsurgical constipation as a result of preoperative bowel preparation (including diet), the lasting effects of anesthesia, the use of narcotics, and the surgery itself. Prior research has shown, moreover, that constipation and incomplete bowel evacuation are not uncommon preoperatively in women with pelvic organ prolapse, she noted.

The study randomized 150 women scheduled to undergo vaginal prolapse surgery with, at a minimum, a planned apical suspension and posterior compartment repair. Surgeries included other prolapse and incontinence procedures.

Women randomized to the bowel preparation group were instructed to have a clear-liquid diet and to self-administer two saline enemas in the late afternoon of the day before surgery.

Those who were randomized to receive no intervention were allowed to have a regular diet. Women in both groups were instructed to eat nothing after midnight on the day of surgery.

All study participants were instructed to complete a bowel diary for 7 days preoperatively and 14 days postoperatively. Those who completed the preoperative diary and 10 of 14 days of the postoperative diary were included in the analysis.

Of the 150 women randomized at the preoperative visit in a 1:1 fashion, 5 withdrew from the study or had surgery canceled, and 121 completed the bowel diary.

The mean time to first bowel movement after surgery was similar in the two groups: 3.3 days in the bowel prep group and 3.2 days in the control group. The groups were also similar with regard to pain, fecal urgency, and stool transit times on the day of the first postoperative bowel movement. The use of antiemetics postoperatively was similar as well (48% and 55% in the bowel prep and no-prep groups, respectively.)

Most of the 121 women – across both groups – used at least one laxative postoperatively, mainly osmotic laxatives. Women who had not received bowel preparation were more likely, however, to report daily fiber use.

"Bowel preparation ... doesn’t appear to affect the return of bowel function and other bowel symptoms postoperatively," Dr. Ballard said. Moreover, "the lack of bowel preparation doesn’t seem to impact painful defecation symptoms, and most women use some type of laxative."

The study’s exclusion criteria included colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, a history of bowel resection, neurological disorders, and symptoms of colonic inertia (fewer than three bowel movements per week). The decision to exclude patients with significant preoperative constipation was made in order to "decrease the risk of bowel dysfunction and was important for our primary outcomes," Dr. Ballard explained. "But there actually were not that many women excluded."

Dr. Ballard reported that she had no disclosures. Two of her five coinvestigators reported various relationships with St. Jude Medical and Pelvalon.

WASHINGTON – Women are not seeking care for even moderate to severe urinary incontinence because they have a fear of treatment and lack knowledge of the etiology of the condition and available treatment options, according to a qualitative focus group study at Kaiser Permanente Orange County (Calif.).

Embarrassment is another barrier. So are physicians themselves, said Dr. Jennifer K. Lee, a urogynecologist at Kaiser in Anaheim, Calif., who reported the findings at the annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

"Providers were mentioned (in the focus groups) to be barriers," Dr. Lee said. "Patients were either dismissed, or they were given misinformation."

By 2050, an estimated 50 million Americans will have urinary incontinence. Previous research has shown, however, that less than 50% of women with moderate incontinence seek care.

The focus group study involved 19 women – 11 who had not sought care but were found after recruitment to have moderate to severe incontinence by the Sandvik severity index, and 8 who had previous treatment or had been evaluated for urinary incontinence.

A moderator led discussions among small groups of these women, all of whom were fluent in English and most of whom (90%) had a college education or higher. The participants were of varying ethnicities, including Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian.

A fear of medical or surgical treatment, including medication side effects and recovery time for surgery, was one of the themes to emerge. Women also said they felt embarrassed and were therefore not likely to raise the issue, particularly with time constraints in their medical visits.

There was a prevailing idea that urinary incontinence is a normal part of aging or childbearing, or that it is hereditary, and that other health issues take priority. Physicians, moreover, did not ask about the issue, and in cases in which it was mentioned, physicians were dismissive or gave misinformation, the study showed.

Dr. Lee said the barriers are significant, and that "there’s a lot of work to be done" to facilitate communication and change practices.

Leaders at Kaiser Permanente Orange County, Anaheim, Calif., plan to give physicians question prompts to incorporate into routine and primary care visits, she noted during a press conference at the meeting. "We also want to work on educational tools for the public," she said.

"There are urinary incontinence questions [for] the Medicare wellness visit, but these are for women over 65," she said. "There certainly are plenty of women under 65 who have incontinence."

Food and Drug Administration warnings about complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh did not come up in the focus group discussions, but Dr. Lee said that in her practice she has seen this controversy feed patients’ fear of incontinence and its treatment.

Study participants were recruited through e-mail research announcements and flyers, as well as more actively through the offices of urogynecology providers.

Dr. Lee said she had no disclosures to report. Her coauthors and research colleagues at the University of California, Irvine, reported numerous disclosures ranging from speakers’ bureau participation and consulting fees at Hospira and Cadence Pharmaceuticals to consultant positions with Medtronic and Boston Scientific.

WASHINGTON – Women are not seeking care for even moderate to severe urinary incontinence because they have a fear of treatment and lack knowledge of the etiology of the condition and available treatment options, according to a qualitative focus group study at Kaiser Permanente Orange County (Calif.).

Embarrassment is another barrier. So are physicians themselves, said Dr. Jennifer K. Lee, a urogynecologist at Kaiser in Anaheim, Calif., who reported the findings at the annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

"Providers were mentioned (in the focus groups) to be barriers," Dr. Lee said. "Patients were either dismissed, or they were given misinformation."

By 2050, an estimated 50 million Americans will have urinary incontinence. Previous research has shown, however, that less than 50% of women with moderate incontinence seek care.

The focus group study involved 19 women – 11 who had not sought care but were found after recruitment to have moderate to severe incontinence by the Sandvik severity index, and 8 who had previous treatment or had been evaluated for urinary incontinence.

A moderator led discussions among small groups of these women, all of whom were fluent in English and most of whom (90%) had a college education or higher. The participants were of varying ethnicities, including Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian.

A fear of medical or surgical treatment, including medication side effects and recovery time for surgery, was one of the themes to emerge. Women also said they felt embarrassed and were therefore not likely to raise the issue, particularly with time constraints in their medical visits.

There was a prevailing idea that urinary incontinence is a normal part of aging or childbearing, or that it is hereditary, and that other health issues take priority. Physicians, moreover, did not ask about the issue, and in cases in which it was mentioned, physicians were dismissive or gave misinformation, the study showed.

Dr. Lee said the barriers are significant, and that "there’s a lot of work to be done" to facilitate communication and change practices.

Leaders at Kaiser Permanente Orange County, Anaheim, Calif., plan to give physicians question prompts to incorporate into routine and primary care visits, she noted during a press conference at the meeting. "We also want to work on educational tools for the public," she said.

"There are urinary incontinence questions [for] the Medicare wellness visit, but these are for women over 65," she said. "There certainly are plenty of women under 65 who have incontinence."

Food and Drug Administration warnings about complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh did not come up in the focus group discussions, but Dr. Lee said that in her practice she has seen this controversy feed patients’ fear of incontinence and its treatment.

Study participants were recruited through e-mail research announcements and flyers, as well as more actively through the offices of urogynecology providers.

Dr. Lee said she had no disclosures to report. Her coauthors and research colleagues at the University of California, Irvine, reported numerous disclosures ranging from speakers’ bureau participation and consulting fees at Hospira and Cadence Pharmaceuticals to consultant positions with Medtronic and Boston Scientific.

WASHINGTON – Women are not seeking care for even moderate to severe urinary incontinence because they have a fear of treatment and lack knowledge of the etiology of the condition and available treatment options, according to a qualitative focus group study at Kaiser Permanente Orange County (Calif.).

Embarrassment is another barrier. So are physicians themselves, said Dr. Jennifer K. Lee, a urogynecologist at Kaiser in Anaheim, Calif., who reported the findings at the annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

"Providers were mentioned (in the focus groups) to be barriers," Dr. Lee said. "Patients were either dismissed, or they were given misinformation."

By 2050, an estimated 50 million Americans will have urinary incontinence. Previous research has shown, however, that less than 50% of women with moderate incontinence seek care.

The focus group study involved 19 women – 11 who had not sought care but were found after recruitment to have moderate to severe incontinence by the Sandvik severity index, and 8 who had previous treatment or had been evaluated for urinary incontinence.

A moderator led discussions among small groups of these women, all of whom were fluent in English and most of whom (90%) had a college education or higher. The participants were of varying ethnicities, including Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian.

A fear of medical or surgical treatment, including medication side effects and recovery time for surgery, was one of the themes to emerge. Women also said they felt embarrassed and were therefore not likely to raise the issue, particularly with time constraints in their medical visits.

There was a prevailing idea that urinary incontinence is a normal part of aging or childbearing, or that it is hereditary, and that other health issues take priority. Physicians, moreover, did not ask about the issue, and in cases in which it was mentioned, physicians were dismissive or gave misinformation, the study showed.

Dr. Lee said the barriers are significant, and that "there’s a lot of work to be done" to facilitate communication and change practices.

Leaders at Kaiser Permanente Orange County, Anaheim, Calif., plan to give physicians question prompts to incorporate into routine and primary care visits, she noted during a press conference at the meeting. "We also want to work on educational tools for the public," she said.

"There are urinary incontinence questions [for] the Medicare wellness visit, but these are for women over 65," she said. "There certainly are plenty of women under 65 who have incontinence."

Food and Drug Administration warnings about complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh did not come up in the focus group discussions, but Dr. Lee said that in her practice she has seen this controversy feed patients’ fear of incontinence and its treatment.

Study participants were recruited through e-mail research announcements and flyers, as well as more actively through the offices of urogynecology providers.

Dr. Lee said she had no disclosures to report. Her coauthors and research colleagues at the University of California, Irvine, reported numerous disclosures ranging from speakers’ bureau participation and consulting fees at Hospira and Cadence Pharmaceuticals to consultant positions with Medtronic and Boston Scientific.

WASHINGTON – Obese women experienced significant improvements in sexual function over 6-24 months after bariatric surgery in a multistudy review, indicating that this outcome should be listed among the possible benefits of surgery in this patient population, Dr. Kalaivani Ramalingam said at a joint annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

In a review of studies published between 1996 and 2013, Dr. Ramalingam of the department of gynecology at Kingston Hospital, Kingston upon Thames, England, and her associates identified five original studies of 254 obese women undergoing bariatric surgery that reported Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores before and after surgery. Studies of nonsurgical weight loss treatments and those that included both men and women were not included. The FSFI evaluates sexual function in six domains: desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain.

Patients in the studies had statistically significant reductions in body mass index over 6-24 months of follow-up (P = .001). In one of the five studies, which enrolled 36 patients, FSFI scores did not improve after surgery.

But in the remaining four studies, there were statistically significant improvements in the overall FSFI scores after surgery (P = .003), Dr. Ramalingam said. In addition, statistically significant improvements in all domains of the score were observed after surgery: increased desire (P = .005), arousal (P = .001), lubrication (P = .003), satisfaction (P = .012) and orgasm (P =.003) – and a decrease in the levels of pain during intercourse (P = .014).

She noted that in one of the five studies, sexual function improved in women with pelvic floor dysfunction and that further studies in this specific group of patients are needed to evaluate the effect of surgery among obese women who are undergoing bariatric surgery and have pelvic floor dysfunction.

An estimated 51% of female bariatric surgery patients report sexual dysfunction, she said.

Dr. Ramalingam and one of her coauthors had no relevant disclosures. The third author disclosed being a speaker for and receiving honoraria from Pfizer, Astellas, and Shire; and serving on an advisory committee for Allergan.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Obese women experienced significant improvements in sexual function over 6-24 months after bariatric surgery in a multistudy review, indicating that this outcome should be listed among the possible benefits of surgery in this patient population, Dr. Kalaivani Ramalingam said at a joint annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

In a review of studies published between 1996 and 2013, Dr. Ramalingam of the department of gynecology at Kingston Hospital, Kingston upon Thames, England, and her associates identified five original studies of 254 obese women undergoing bariatric surgery that reported Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores before and after surgery. Studies of nonsurgical weight loss treatments and those that included both men and women were not included. The FSFI evaluates sexual function in six domains: desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain.

Patients in the studies had statistically significant reductions in body mass index over 6-24 months of follow-up (P = .001). In one of the five studies, which enrolled 36 patients, FSFI scores did not improve after surgery.

But in the remaining four studies, there were statistically significant improvements in the overall FSFI scores after surgery (P = .003), Dr. Ramalingam said. In addition, statistically significant improvements in all domains of the score were observed after surgery: increased desire (P = .005), arousal (P = .001), lubrication (P = .003), satisfaction (P = .012) and orgasm (P =.003) – and a decrease in the levels of pain during intercourse (P = .014).

She noted that in one of the five studies, sexual function improved in women with pelvic floor dysfunction and that further studies in this specific group of patients are needed to evaluate the effect of surgery among obese women who are undergoing bariatric surgery and have pelvic floor dysfunction.

An estimated 51% of female bariatric surgery patients report sexual dysfunction, she said.

Dr. Ramalingam and one of her coauthors had no relevant disclosures. The third author disclosed being a speaker for and receiving honoraria from Pfizer, Astellas, and Shire; and serving on an advisory committee for Allergan.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Obese women experienced significant improvements in sexual function over 6-24 months after bariatric surgery in a multistudy review, indicating that this outcome should be listed among the possible benefits of surgery in this patient population, Dr. Kalaivani Ramalingam said at a joint annual meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society.

In a review of studies published between 1996 and 2013, Dr. Ramalingam of the department of gynecology at Kingston Hospital, Kingston upon Thames, England, and her associates identified five original studies of 254 obese women undergoing bariatric surgery that reported Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores before and after surgery. Studies of nonsurgical weight loss treatments and those that included both men and women were not included. The FSFI evaluates sexual function in six domains: desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain.

Patients in the studies had statistically significant reductions in body mass index over 6-24 months of follow-up (P = .001). In one of the five studies, which enrolled 36 patients, FSFI scores did not improve after surgery.

But in the remaining four studies, there were statistically significant improvements in the overall FSFI scores after surgery (P = .003), Dr. Ramalingam said. In addition, statistically significant improvements in all domains of the score were observed after surgery: increased desire (P = .005), arousal (P = .001), lubrication (P = .003), satisfaction (P = .012) and orgasm (P =.003) – and a decrease in the levels of pain during intercourse (P = .014).

She noted that in one of the five studies, sexual function improved in women with pelvic floor dysfunction and that further studies in this specific group of patients are needed to evaluate the effect of surgery among obese women who are undergoing bariatric surgery and have pelvic floor dysfunction.

An estimated 51% of female bariatric surgery patients report sexual dysfunction, she said.

Dr. Ramalingam and one of her coauthors had no relevant disclosures. The third author disclosed being a speaker for and receiving honoraria from Pfizer, Astellas, and Shire; and serving on an advisory committee for Allergan.

[email protected]