Linder, Brian J.

ABSTRACTIntroduction and ObjectiveProcedural therapies for overactive bladder (OAB) most often include intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) injections, sacral neuromodulation (SNM), and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS). Despite their proven efficacy, real‐world data on therapy continuation and crossover rates between these modalities remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate longitudinal patterns of treatment continuation and therapy crossover among women receiving procedural OAB treatments.MethodsWe conducted a multi‐institutional retrospective cohort study of women with idiopathic OAB who underwent index BTX, SNM, or PTNS between 2014 and 2022. Patients were identified using electronic medical records, and follow‐up data were collected through December 31, 2023. The primary outcomes included duration of maintenance treatments and crossover to another procedural therapy for OAB. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis estimated rates of continued treatment, and a log‐rank test assessed differences in crossover rates among treatment groups.ResultsA total of 506 women met inclusion criteria: 266 (52.6%) received BTX, 114 (22.5%) underwent SNM, and 126 (24.9%) received PTNS. Ongoing treatment rates were lowest for PTNS, with only 17.1% maintaining therapy between 3 and 5 years and 26.1% crossing over to another procedure within 3 years. Among BTX patients, 65.2% underwent repeat treatment within 3 years, and 9.5% of patients crossed over to another procedure within 3 years. Of those with 5 or more years of follow‐up, 39.1% of patients continued with BTX procedures in the 3–5‐year follow‐up timeframe. Among SNM patients, the cumulative revision rates were 7.6% at 1 year and 10.9% at 2 years. 13.1% of patients crossed over from SNM to another procedure within 3 years (the vast majority to BTX).ConclusionsPTNS had the lowest ongoing therapy rates and the highest crossover rates. BTX and SNM demonstrated similar crossover rates. These findings underscore the importance of individualized patient counseling and treatment selection based on expectations of therapy persistence. Future research should focus on optimizing patient selection, improving long‐term adherence strategies, and evaluating novel or combined therapeutic approaches for OAB management.

ABSTRACT Aims To discuss the use of urodynamic testing for female stress urinary incontinence and provide a narrative review of the current evidence regarding the utility of urodynamics across the spectrum of clinical presentations. Methods A nonsystemic, extensive literature review via PubMed was performed on the use of urodynamics for female stress urinary incontinence. Results Findings from several large multicenter trials and subsequent secondary analyses have significantly influenced treatment patterns away from the routine use of urodynamics in female patients with uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence. Much of the current literature focuses on selected patients with uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence that are subsequently treated with midurethral sling placement. These studies comprise the foundational evidence supporting multiple national and international guidelines on the topic. In uncomplicated patients, these guidelines do not support the routine use of urodynamics. However, in more complicated presentations, urodynamic studies are more often valuable for diagnosis and management. Conclusions Routine use of urodynamic testing is not currently recommended in guidelines for evaluating uncomplicated female stress urinary incontinence. It is important to recognize that much of the evidence supporting these recommendations is derived from a select population of uncomplicated patients, which may limit generalizability to more complex cases. In such cases, urodynamic testing may be more useful to guide diagnosis and management, though further research is needed to identify which findings have the greatest impact on clinical outcomes.

ABSTRACTIntroductionArtificial Urinary Sphincter (AUS) placement is the preferred treatment for moderate to severe incontinence following prostate cancer treatment. While device related outcomes related to device survival are well reported, literature on quality‐of‐life outcomes, including the use of validated measures is limited.MethodsWe queried a prospectively maintained database of male patients undergoing primary AUS implantation from 2015 to 2023 at our institution. All patients completed a preoperative Michigan Incontinence Symptom Index (M‐ISI) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI‐I). Postoperative quality of life data was obtained by mailed correspondence. Surveys obtained following AUS reoperation/revision were excluded. Pairwise comparisons were performed between preoperative functional status and the Postoperative responses. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify preoperative variables associated with a favorable PGI‐I score defined as “very much better or much better,” or a decrease in pad usage from > 1 pad per day to ≤ 1 pad per day.ResultsDuring the study timeframe, 383 patients underwent primary AUS placement, of which 163 patients (42%) completed a postoperative survey and were included in the study. Median age was 69.0 (IQR: 64–74) and 54.6% of patients had a history of pelvic radiation. The median time from surgery to the postoperative survey was 2.2 years (IQR: 0.9, 4.3). Compared to baseline, following AUS placement there was a significant improvement in the total M‐ISI score (10 [6, 16) vs 26 [22, 30]; p < 0.0001) (Minimally Important Difference = 4). This included improvements in the SUI subscore [4 (IQR 2, 6) vs 10 (IQR: 9, 12); p < 0.0001] and bother score [1 (IQR: 0, 3) vs 6 (IQR: 5, 7); p < 0.001)]. Pad usage significantly decreased following device placement (p < 0.0001). The vast majority of patients (90.7%) would “definitely or probably recommend to a friend/family member.” On univariable analysis, active smoking (ref. never) was associated with adverse pad use outcomes (OR: 0.1, 95% CI: 0–0.8; p = 0.03) and older age was associated with adverse PGI‐I outcome (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87–0.99; p = 0.02).ConclusionsFollowing AUS implantation, most patients have significant improvement in validated quality of life outcomes and low pad usage. These findings persist despite multiple preoperative comorbidities and should be considered when counseling patients before AUS placement.

AbstractPurposeThe purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence‐based guidance to clinicians of all specialties on the evaluation, management, and treatment of idiopathic overactive bladder (OAB). The guideline informs the reader on valid diagnostic processes and provides an approach to selecting treatment options for patients with OAB through the shared decision‐making process, which will maximize symptom control and quality of life, while minimizing adverse events and burden of disease.MethodsAn electronic search employing OVID was used to systematically search the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, as well as the Cochrane Library, for systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating diagnosis and treatment of OAB from January 2013 to November 2023. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies were based on the Key Questions and the populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes, timing, types of studies and settings (PICOTS) of interest. Following the study selection process, 159 studies were included and were used to inform evidence‐based recommendation statements.ResultsThis guideline produced 33 statements that cover the evaluation and diagnosis of the patient with symptoms suggestive of OAB; the treatment options for patients with OAB, including Noninvasive therapies, pharmacotherapy, minimally invasive therapies, invasive therapies, and indwelling catheters; and the management of patients with BPH and OAB.ConclusionOnce the diagnosis of OAB is made, the clinician and the patient with OAB have a variety of treatment options to choose from and should, through shared decision‐making, formulate a personalized treatment approach taking into account evidence‐based recommendations as well as patient values and preferences.

Importance Improving opioid stewardship is important, given the common use of opioids and resultant adverse events. Evidence-based prescribing recommendations for surgeons may help reduce opioid prescribing after specific procedures. Objective The aim of this study was to assess longitudinal prescribing patterns for patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the 2 years before and after implementing evidence-based opioid prescribing recommendations. Study Design In December 2017, a 3-tiered opioid prescribing recommendation was created based on prospective data on postoperative opioid use after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. For this follow-up study, prescribing patterns, including quantity of opioids prescribed (in oral morphine equivalents [OMEs]) and refill rates, were retrospectively compared for patients undergoing prolapse surgery before (November 2015–November 2017; n = 238) and after (December 2017–December 2019; n = 361) recommendation implementation. Univariate analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon rank sum and χ 2 tests. Cochran-Armitage trend tests and interrupted time-series analysis tested for significance in the change in OMEs prescribed before versus after recommendation implementation. Results After recommendation implementation, the quantity of postoperative opioids prescribed decreased from median 225 mg OME (interquartile range, 225, 300 mg OME) to 71.3 mg OME (interquartile range, 0, 112.5 mg OME; P < 0.0001). Decreases also occurred within each subgroup of prolapse surgery: native tissue vaginal repair (P < 0.0001), robotic sacrocolpopexy (P < 0.0001), open sacrocolpopexy (P < 0.0001), and colpocleisis (P < 0.003). The proportion of patients discharged following prolapse surgery without opioids increased (4.2% vs 36.6%; P < 0.0001), and the rate of opioid refills increased (2.1% vs 6.0%; P = 0.02). Conclusions With 2 years of postimplementation follow-up, the use of procedure-specific, tiered opioid prescribing recommendations at our institution was associated with a significant, sustained reduction in opioids prescribed. This study further supports using evidence-based recommendations for opioid prescribing.

Importance Data comparing perioperative outcomes between transvaginal, transabdominal, and laparoscopic/robotic vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) repair are limited but are important for surgical planning and patient counseling. Objective This study aimed to assess perioperative morbidity of VVF repair performed via various approaches. Study Design The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify women who underwent transvaginal, transabdominal, or laparoscopic/robotic VVF repair from 2009 to 2020. Associations of surgical approach with baseline characteristics, blood transfusion, prolonged hospitalization (>4 days), and 30-day outcomes (any major or minor complication or return to the operating room) were evaluated with χ2, Fisher exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the adjusted association of approach with 30-day complications and prolonged hospitalization. Results Overall, 449 women underwent VVF repair, including 252 transvaginal (56.1%), 148 transabdominal (33.0%), and 49 laparoscopic/robotic procedures (10.9%). Abdominal repair was associated with a longer length of hospitalization (median, 3 days vs 1 day transvaginal and laparoscopic/robotic; P < 0.001), higher risk of prolonged length of stay (abdominal, 21.1%; transvaginal, 4.0%; laparoscopic/robotic, 2.0%; P < 0.001), major complications (abdominal, 4.7%; transvaginal, 0.8%; laparoscopic/robotic, 0.0%; P = 0.03), and perioperative transfusion (abdominal, 5.0%; transvaginal, 0.0%; laparoscopic/robotic, 2.1%; P = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, the abdominal approach was independently associated with an increased risk of prolonged hospitalization compared with laparoscopic/robotic (odds ratio, 12.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.63–93.21; P = 0.02) and transvaginal (odds ratio, 6.09; 95% confidence interval, 2.87–12.92; P < 0.001) but not with major/minor complications (P = 0.76). Conclusion Transvaginal and laparoscopic/robotic approaches to VVF repair are associated with lower rates of prolonged hospitalization, major complications, and readmission compared with a transabdominal approach.