An Unusual Case of Urinary Tract Infection in a Pregnant Woman With Photobacterium damsela

We describe a case of a urinary tract infection with an unusual pathogen, Photobacterium damsela, in a pregnant female. This pathogen has been described as having a virulent life threatening nature, so a detailed history and prompt treatment is needed

Missing Data Frequency and Correlates in Two Randomized Surgical Trials for Urinary Incontinence in Women

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Missing data is frequently observed in clinical trials; high rates of missing data may jeopardize trial outcome validity. PURPOSE: We determined the rates of missing data over time, by type of data collected and compared demographic and clinical factors associated with missing data among women who participated in two large randomized clinical trials of surgery for stress urinary incontinence, the Stress Incontinence Surgical Treatment Efficacy Trial (SISTEr) and the Trial of Midurethral Sling (TOMUS). METHODS: The proportions of subjects who attended and missed each follow-up visit were calculated. The chi-squared test, Fisher\u27s exact test and t test were used to compare women with and without missing data, as well as the completeness of the data for each component of the composite primary outcome. RESULTS: Data completeness for the primary outcome computation in the TOMUS trial (62.3%) was nearly double that in the SISTEr trial (35.7%). The follow-up visit attendance rate decreased over time. A higher proportion of subjects attended all follow-up visits in the TOMUS trial and overall there were fewer missing data for the period that included the primary outcome assessment at 12 months. The highest levels of complete data for the composite outcome variables were for the symptoms questionnaire (SISTEr 100 %, TOMUS 99.8%) and the urinary stress test (SISTEr 96.1%, TOMUS 96.7%). In both studies, the pad test was associated with the lowest levels of complete data (SISTEr 85.1%, TOMUS 88.3%) and approximately one in ten subjects had incomplete voiding diaries at the time of primary outcome assessment. Generally, in both studies, a higher proportion of younger subjects had missing data. This analysis lacked a patient perspective as to the reasons for missing data that could have provided additional information on subject burden, motivations for adherence and study design. In addition, we were unable to compare the effects of the different primary outcome assessment time-points in an identically designed trial. CONCLUSIONS: Missing visits and data increased with time. Questionnaire data and physical outcome data (urinary stress test) that could be assessed during a visit were least prone to missing data, whereas data for variables that required subject effort while away from the research team (pad test, voiding diary) were more likely to be missing. Older subjects were more likely to provide complete data

Controlling anal incontinence in women by performing anal exercises with biofeedback or loperamide (CAPABLe) trial: Design and methods

The goals of this trial are to determine the efficacy and safety of two treatments for women experiencing fecal incontinence. First, we aim to compare the use of loperamide to placebo and second, to compare the use of anal sphincter exercises with biofeedback to usual care. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in the St. Mark's (Vaizey) Score 24 weeks after treatment initiation. As a Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (PFDN) trial, subjects are enrolling from eight PFDN clinical centers across the United States. A centralized data coordinating center supervises data collection and analysis. These two first-line treatments for fecal incontinence are being investigated simultaneously using a two-by-two randomized factorial design: a medication intervention (loperamide versus placebo) and a pelvic floor strength and sensory training intervention (anal sphincter exercises with manometry-assisted biofeedback versus usual care using an educational pamphlet). Interventionists providing the anal sphincter exercise training with biofeedback have received standardized training and assessment. Symptom severity, diary, standardized anorectal manometry and health-related quality of life outcomes are assessed using validated instruments administered by researchers masked to randomized interventions. Cost effectiveness analyses will be performed using prospectively collected data on care costs and resource utilization. This article describes the rationale and design of this randomized trial, focusing on specific research concepts of interest to researchers in the field of female pelvic floor disorders and all other providers who care for patients with fecal incontinence

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Pelvic Floor Muscle Training to a Pilates Exercise Program for Improving Pelvic Muscle Strength

Introduction and hypothesis The purpose of this study is to determine whether a Pilates exercise program and a pelvic floor muscle-training (PFMT) program could provide similar improvements in pelvic muscle strength. Methods Sixty-two women with little or no pelvic floor dysfunction were randomized to Pilates or PFMT. Each group had 24 biweekly 1-h sessions with either a physical therapist or Pilates instructor. Strength was measured via perineometry (cmH2O). Two questionnaires-pelvic floor distress inventory (PFDI-20) and pelvic floor impact questionnaire (PFIQ-7)-were also collected. Results At baseline, the Pilates and PFMT groups measured 14.9±12.5 and 12.5±10.4 cmH2O, respectively (p=0.41). Both the Pilates and PFMT groups got stronger (6.2± 7.5 cmH2O, p=0.0002 and 6.6±7.4 cmH2O, p=0.0002, respectively), with no difference between groups p=0.85. PFIQ and PFDI scores improved from baseline but not between groups. Conclusions Further study is required to determine if Pilates can actually treat pelvic floor dysfunctio

Measuring the impact of a posterior compartment procedure on symptoms of obstructed defecation and posterior vaginal compartment anatomy.

Introduction and hypothesisWe hypothesized that there would be a significant difference in changes in obstructed defecation symptoms and posterior compartment prolapse between women who underwent posterior vaginal wall prolapse repair (PR) and those who did not.MethodsThis was a two-site prospective cohort study of women undergoing prolapse or incontinence surgery in which a PR was, or was not, performed at the discretion of the surgeon. Women were assessed using validated obstructed defecation questionnaires and standardized examination measures (including POP-Q, measurement of transverse gh, and assessment for a rectovaginal pocket and laxity) prior to pelvic surgery and 12 weeks after surgery.ResultsOf 68 women who underwent surgery, 43 had PR. The PR group had higher obstructed defecation symptoms and greater posterior compartment prolapse at baseline. At 12 weeks, obstructed defecation symptoms had improved significantly more in the PR group than in the no PR group (all p < 0.03). Anatomic outcomes showed greater improvement in point Bp in the PR group (-3.4 vs. -0.7 no PR, p < 0.001) and resolution of the rectovaginal pocket (86 % vs. 42 %, p = 0.002). There were no significant changes in obstructed defecation symptoms or anatomic outcomes from baseline in the no PR group, while the PR group showed significantly improved obstructed defecation symptoms and anatomic outcomes after repair (p < 0.001 for both).ConclusionsSignificant improvements in obstructed defecation symptoms and posterior compartment prolapse were seen after PR, but not in women who did not receive PR. Obstructed defecation symptoms, Bp and rectovaginal pocket were the measures best able to demonstrate improvement after PR. We recommend the use of these measures to assess the impact of surgery in the posterior compartment

A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Introduction and hypothesisWe investigated the efficiency and efficacy of vaginal mesh attachment using interrupted, non-barbed, delayed absorbable sutures in comparison with a running, barbed, delayed absorbable suture during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC).MethodsWomen undergoing LSC or RSC were recruited. Participants were randomized to at least six 0 PDS non-barbed interrupted sutures or at least six passes of a 1 PDS barbed suture (Quill™) on each anterior and posterior polypropylene mesh leaflet. The primary outcome was the time to attach the mesh to the vagina. The LSC and RSC groups were block randomized by suture type. Secondary outcomes included: (1) intraoperative surgeon assessment of satisfaction as measured using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), (2) postoperative POP-Q evaluation for anatomic failure, and (3) overall appearance of vaginal walls measured using a VAS.ResultsOf the 64 included subjects who were randomized, 32 had mesh attachment with the barbed suture (16 LSC, 16 RSC) and 32 had attachment with non-barbed sutures (16 LSC, 16 RSC). Among all the subjects (LSC and RSC), the non-barbed suture group had significantly longer mesh attachment times than the barbed suture group (42 vs. 29 min, p < 0.001). The non-barbed suture group had significantly better scores for intraoperative ease of suture placement, surgeon satisfaction with mesh appearance, and global satisfaction. At 12 months, there were no significant differences in anatomic failure between the suture groups or overall appearance of the vaginal walls (p > 0.05).ConclusionsThe barbed suture technique was 11 - 16 min faster for attaching mesh to the vagina than the non-barbed suture technique. Anatomic outcomes at 12 months were comparable between the suture groups. It is reasonable to use a running, barbed suture in minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy

A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Introduction and hypothesisWe investigated the efficiency and efficacy of vaginal mesh attachment using interrupted, non-barbed, delayed absorbable sutures in comparison with a running, barbed, delayed absorbable suture during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC).MethodsWomen undergoing LSC or RSC were recruited. Participants were randomized to at least six 0 PDS non-barbed interrupted sutures or at least six passes of a 1 PDS barbed suture (Quill™) on each anterior and posterior polypropylene mesh leaflet. The primary outcome was the time to attach the mesh to the vagina. The LSC and RSC groups were block randomized by suture type. Secondary outcomes included: (1) intraoperative surgeon assessment of satisfaction as measured using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), (2) postoperative POP-Q evaluation for anatomic failure, and (3) overall appearance of vaginal walls measured using a VAS.ResultsOf the 64 included subjects who were randomized, 32 had mesh attachment with the barbed suture (16 LSC, 16 RSC) and 32 had attachment with non-barbed sutures (16 LSC, 16 RSC). Among all the subjects (LSC and RSC), the non-barbed suture group had significantly longer mesh attachment times than the barbed suture group (42 vs. 29 min, p < 0.001). The non-barbed suture group had significantly better scores for intraoperative ease of suture placement, surgeon satisfaction with mesh appearance, and global satisfaction. At 12 months, there were no significant differences in anatomic failure between the suture groups or overall appearance of the vaginal walls (p > 0.05).ConclusionsThe barbed suture technique was 11 - 16 min faster for attaching mesh to the vagina than the non-barbed suture technique. Anatomic outcomes at 12 months were comparable between the suture groups. It is reasonable to use a running, barbed suture in minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy

Controlling anal incontinence in women by performing anal exercises with biofeedback or loperamide (CAPABLe) trial: Design and methods.

The goals of this trial are to determine the efficacy and safety of two treatments for women experiencing fecal incontinence. First, we aim to compare the use of loperamide to placebo and second, to compare the use of anal sphincter exercises with biofeedback to usual care. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in the St. Mark's (Vaizey) Score 24weeks after treatment initiation. As a Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (PFDN) trial, subjects are enrolling from eight PFDN clinical centers across the United States. A centralized data coordinating center supervises data collection and analysis. These two first-line treatments for fecal incontinence are being investigated simultaneously using a two-by-two randomized factorial design: a medication intervention (loperamide versus placebo) and a pelvic floor strength and sensory training intervention (anal sphincter exercises with manometry-assisted biofeedback versus usual care using an educational pamphlet). Interventionists providing the anal sphincter exercise training with biofeedback have received standardized training and assessment. Symptom severity, diary, standardized anorectal manometry and health-related quality of life outcomes are assessed using validated instruments administered by researchers masked to randomized interventions. Cost effectiveness analyses will be performed using prospectively collected data on care costs and resource utilization. This article describes the rationale and design of this randomized trial, focusing on specific research concepts of interest to researchers in the field of female pelvic floor disorders and all other providers who care for patients with fecal incontinence

Controlling anal incontinence in women by performing anal exercises with biofeedback or loperamide (CAPABLe) trial: Design and methods.

The goals of this trial are to determine the efficacy and safety of two treatments for women experiencing fecal incontinence. First, we aim to compare the use of loperamide to placebo and second, to compare the use of anal sphincter exercises with biofeedback to usual care. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in the St. Mark's (Vaizey) Score 24weeks after treatment initiation. As a Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (PFDN) trial, subjects are enrolling from eight PFDN clinical centers across the United States. A centralized data coordinating center supervises data collection and analysis. These two first-line treatments for fecal incontinence are being investigated simultaneously using a two-by-two randomized factorial design: a medication intervention (loperamide versus placebo) and a pelvic floor strength and sensory training intervention (anal sphincter exercises with manometry-assisted biofeedback versus usual care using an educational pamphlet). Interventionists providing the anal sphincter exercise training with biofeedback have received standardized training and assessment. Symptom severity, diary, standardized anorectal manometry and health-related quality of life outcomes are assessed using validated instruments administered by researchers masked to randomized interventions. Cost effectiveness analyses will be performed using prospectively collected data on care costs and resource utilization. This article describes the rationale and design of this randomized trial, focusing on specific research concepts of interest to researchers in the field of female pelvic floor disorders and all other providers who care for patients with fecal incontinence