Liposomal versus plain bupivacaine for pain control following vaginal reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a depot formulation of bupivacaine, which releases the drug over 72 hours to prolong local pain control. This retrospective study compares the effect of using LB versus plain bupivacaine on postoperative pain control, length of hospital stay and cost among patients undergoing vaginal reconstructive surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent vaginal reconstructive surgery with levatorplasty and received an injection of 20 cc of either plain bupivacaine or LB for pudendal nerve block were included. The primary outcomes included postoperative narcotic use and subjective pain score. The secondary outcome was postoperative length of stay. Comparisons between groups were performed using the T test, Mann Whitney U and Chi-square tests with p < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and December 2021, 25 patients had received LB as a pudendal nerve block and 25 had received plain bupivacaine. Demographics between groups were similar. There was no difference between postoperative morphine equivalent dose (MED) for plain bupivacaine versus LB (25.3 ± 65.8 vs. 24.9 ± 31.7 MED; p = 0.159) or length of hospital stay (15.8 ± 12.0 hours vs. 23.8 ± 20.0; p = 0.094). Furthermore, subjective pain was also similar between groups (0 vs. 1.6 ± 2.6, p = 0.68), (4.6 ± 2.3 vs. 4.9 ± 2.0 average POD 1 pain, p = 0.534) and (4.3 ± 2.1 for vs. 4.9 ± 2.1 average POD 2 pain, p = 0.373). CONCLUSION: LB is not superior to plain bupivacaine for controlling pain following vaginal reconstructive surgery, and justification for the exponentially greater cost of LB is not supported. Prospective investigations with larger sample sizes are needed to determine the optimal pain management for levatorplasty in vaginal reconstructive surgery.

Evaluation of progression from first to second stage sacral neuromodulation and unplanned device removal.

OBJECTIVE: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an advanced treatment option for patients with refractory overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms, urinary retention, and bowel disorders; it is usually performed in 2 separate procedures. This study aims to determine a cohort's progression rate from stage 1 to 2 and predict factors for progression and unplanned device removal or revision. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted in patients who underwent SNM at a single institution between June 2012 and May 2019. Progression rates from stage 1 to 2, patient characteristics, and indications for unplanned SNM removal or revision were recorded. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Fisher's exact tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients underwent SNM for 1 or more of the following diagnoses: OAB (n=103), urinary retention (n=15), neurogenic bladder dysfunction (n=4), fecal incontinence (n=2), and constipation (n=4). The progression rate to stage 2 was 92.2% (118/128). Patients who failed to progress to stage 2 had additional diagnoses other than OAB, such as urinary retention or bowel disorders (p=0.007). Fifteen patients (12.7%) required SNM removal or revision within 4 years of surgery. Among these patients, the body mass index was significantly lower (p=0.036). CONCLUSION: Most patients (92.2%) progressed to stage 2. Patients with only OAB symptoms had a higher progression rate to stage 2. Single full-stage procedures may be considered in select patients to reduce morbidity, time, and costs.