No abstract

No abstract

Physical examination methods to evaluate pelvic musculature for presence of myofascial pain varied significantly and were often undefined. Given the known role of pelvic floor myofascial pain in chronic pelvic pain and link between pelvic floor myofascial pain and lower urinary tract symptoms, physicians should be trained to evaluate for pelvic floor myofascial pain as part of their physical examination in patients presenting with these symptoms. Therefore, the development and standardization of a reliable and reproducible examination is needed.

(Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(3):310.e1–e7) The main purpose of this nested case control study was to investigate a modern obstetric cohort in order to identify risk factors and develop prediction models for perineal lacerations and obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI, third and fourth degree lacerations) during vaginal delivery. In addition, this study also reevaluated the known risk factors in order to potentially identify new risk factors for any perineal laceration and OASI so as to determine the role of parity in the risk of sustaining any perineal laceration and OASI.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor myofascial pain is common, but physical examination methods to assess pelvic floor muscles are defined poorly. We hypothesized that a simple, transvaginal pelvic floor examination could be developed that would be highly reproducible among providers and would adequately screen for the presence of pelvic floor myofascial pain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a simple, reproducible pelvic floor examination to screen for pelvic floor myofascial pain. STUDY DESIGN: A screening examination was developed by Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery subspecialists and women's health physical therapists at our institution and tested in a simulated patient. We recruited 35 new patients who underwent examinations by blinded, paired, independent examiners. Agreement was calculated with the use of percent agreement and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether outcomes are different if controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) is started in the luteal phase rather than the follicular phase. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and eight studies with a total of 338 women were included in the quantitative analysis. Results Cycles initiated in the luteal phase were slightly longer (WMD 1.1 days, 95 % CI 0.39-1.9) and utilized more total gonadotropins (WMD 817 IU, 95 % CI 489-1144). However, no differences were noted in peak estradiol levels (WMD −411 pg/ml, 95 % CI −906-84.7) or in the total number of oocytes retrieved (WMD 0.52 oocytes, 95 % CI −0.74-1.7). There were slightly more mature oocytes retrieved in the luteal phase (WMD 0.77 oocytes, 95 % CI 0.21-1.3), and fertilization rates were significantly higher (WMD 10 %, 95 % CI 0.03-0.18). While only three studies reported pregnancy outcomes, no difference was noted in the FET pregnancy rates after COS in the luteal versus follicular phase (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.56-1.7).A post hoc power analysis revealed that a sample of this size was sufficient to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 2 oocytes retrieved with 93 % power.Conclusion Although initiating COS in the luteal phase requires a longer stimulation and a higher dose of total gonadotropin, these differences are not clinically significant. Furthermore, COS initiated in the luteal phase does not compromise the quantity or quality of oocytes retrieved compared to outcomes of traditional stimulation in the follicular phase.

Background Apical vaginal support is considered the keystone of pelvic organ support. Level I evidence supports re-establishment of apical support at time of hysterectomy, regardless of whether the hysterectomy is performed for prolapse. National rates of apical support procedure performance at time of inpatient hysterectomy have not been well described. Objective To estimate trends and factors associated with use of apical support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy for benign indications in a large national database. Study Design The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify hysterectomies performed from 2004–2013 for benign indications. ICD-9 codes were used to select both procedures and diagnoses. The primary outcome was performance of an apical support procedure at time of hysterectomy. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed. Results There were 3,509,230 inpatient hysterectomies performed for benign disease between 2004 and 2013. In both non-prolapse and prolapse groups, there was a significant decrease in total number of annual hysterectomies performed over the study period (p <0.0001). There were 2,790,652 (79.5%) hysterectomies performed without a diagnosis of prolapse, and an apical support procedure was performed in only 85,879 (3.1%). There was a significant decrease in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (high of 4.0% in 2004 to 2.5% in 2013, p <0.0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (large and medium), and hysterectomy type (vaginal and laparoscopically-assisted vaginal) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure. During the study period, 718,578 (20.5%) inpatient hysterectomies were performed for prolapse diagnoses and 266,743 (37.1%) included an apical support procedure. There was a significant increase in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (low of 31.3% in 2005 to 49.3% in 2013, p<0.0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (medium and large), and hysterectomy type (total laparoscopic and laparoscopic supracervical) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure. Conclusions This national database study demonstrates that apical support procedures are not routinely performed at time of inpatient hysterectomy regardless of presence of prolapse diagnosis. Educational efforts are needed to increase awareness of the importance of re-establishing apical vaginal support at time of hysterectomy regardless of indication.

Long-term sequelae, including pain, dyspareunia, and fecal incontinence, significantly impact quality of life for many patients who suffer OASISs and may be avoided if evidence-based guidelines for recognition and repair are utilized.