Browsing by Author "Gantz, Marie"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Effect of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension vs Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation With or Without Perioperative Behavioral Therapy for Pelvic Organ Vaginal Prolapse on Surgical Outcomes and Prolapse Symptoms at 5 Years in the OPTIMAL Randomized Clinical Trial.
    (JAMA, 2018-04) Jelovsek, J Eric; Barber, Matthew D; Brubaker, Linda; Norton, Peggy; Gantz, Marie; Richter, Holly E; Weidner, Alison; Menefee, Shawn; Schaffer, Joseph; Pugh, Norma; Meikle, Susan; NICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders Network
    Uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) are commonly performed pelvic organ prolapse procedures despite a lack of long-term efficacy data.To compare outcomes in women randomized to (1) ULS or SSLF and (2) usual care or perioperative behavioral therapy and pelvic floor muscle training (BPMT) for vaginal apical prolapse.This 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial was conducted at 9 US medical centers. Eligible participants who completed the Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss Trial enrolled between January 2008 and March 2011 and were followed up 5 years after their index surgery from April 2011 through June 2016.Two randomizations: (1) BPMT (n = 186) or usual care (n = 188) and (2) surgical intervention (ULS: n = 188 or SSLF: n = 186).The primary surgical outcome was time to surgical failure. Surgical failure was defined as (1) apical descent greater than one-third of total vaginal length or anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen or retreatment for prolapse (anatomic failure), or (2) bothersome bulge symptoms. The primary behavioral outcomes were time to anatomic failure and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory scores (range, 0-300).The original study randomized 374 patients, of whom 309 were eligible for this extended trial. For this study, 285 enrolled (mean age, 57.2 years), of whom 244 (86%) completed the extended trial. By year 5, the estimated surgical failure rate was 61.5% in the ULS group and 70.3% in the SSLF group (adjusted difference, -8.8% [95% CI, -24.2 to 6.6]). The estimated anatomic failure rate was 45.6% in the BPMT group and 47.2% in the usual care group (adjusted difference, -1.6% [95% CI, -21.2 to 17.9]). Improvements in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory scores were -59.4 in the BPMT group and -61.8 in the usual care group (adjusted mean difference, 2.4 [95% CI, -13.7 to 18.4]).Among women who had undergone vaginal surgery for apical pelvic organ vaginal prolapse, there was no significant difference between ULS and SSLF in rates of surgical failure and no significant difference between perioperative behavioral muscle training and usual care on rates of anatomic success and symptom scores at 5 years. Compared with outcomes at 2 years, rates of surgical failure increased during the follow-up period, although prolapse symptom scores remained improved.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01166373.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Methods for a multicenter randomized trial for mixed urinary incontinence: rationale and patient-centeredness of the ESTEEM trial.
    (Int Urogynecol J, 2016-10) Sung, Vivian W; Borello-France, Diane; Dunivan, Gena; Gantz, Marie; Lukacz, Emily S; Moalli, Pamela; Newman, Diane K; Richter, Holly E; Ridgeway, Beri; Smith, Ariana L; Weidner, Alison C; Meikle, Susan; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network
    INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) can be a challenging condition to manage. We describe the protocol design and rationale for the Effects of Surgical Treatment Enhanced with Exercise for Mixed Urinary Incontinence (ESTEEM) trial, designed to compare a combined conservative and surgical treatment approach versus surgery alone for improving patient-centered MUI outcomes at 12 months. METHODS: ESTEEM is a multisite, prospective, randomized trial of female participants with MUI randomized to a standardized perioperative behavioral/pelvic floor exercise intervention plus midurethral sling versus midurethral sling alone. We describe our methods and four challenges encountered during the design phase: defining the study population, selecting relevant patient-centered outcomes, determining sample size estimates using a patient-reported outcome measure, and designing an analysis plan that accommodates MUI failure rates. A central theme in the design was patient centeredness, which guided many key decisions. Our primary outcome is patient-reported MUI symptoms measured using the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI) score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, sexual function, cost-effectiveness, time to failure, and need for additional treatment. RESULTS: The final study design was implemented in November 2013 across eight clinical sites in the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. As of 27 February 2016, 433 total/472 targeted participants had been randomized. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the ESTEEM protocol and our methods for reaching consensus for methodological challenges in designing a trial for MUI by maintaining the patient perspective at the core of key decisions. This trial will provide information that can directly impact patient care and clinical decision making.