Does trocar puncture of the bladder during midurethral sling impact postoperative urinary storage and voiding symptoms?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The incidence of trocar bladder puncture during midurethral sling (MUS) surgery varies widely. We aim to further characterize risk factors for bladder puncture and examine its long-term impact on storage and emptying. METHODS: This is an Institutional Review Board-approved, retrospective chart review of women who underwent MUS surgery at our institution from 2004 to 2018 with ≥12 months of follow-up. Unless prolonged catheterization was necessary, a voiding trial was performed prior to discharge, or the next morning in outpatients, regardless of puncture. Preoperative and postoperative details were obtained from office charts and operative records. RESULTS: Of 1,500 women, 1,063 (71%) had retropubic (RP) and 437 (29%) had transobturator MUS surgery. Mean follow-up was 34 months. Thirty-five women (2.3%) sustained a bladder puncture. RP approach and lower BMI were significantly associated with puncture. No statistical association was found between bladder puncture and age, previous pelvic surgery, or concomitant surgery. Mean day of discharge and day of successful voiding trial were not statistically different between the puncture and nonpuncture groups. There was no statistically significant difference in de novo storage and emptying symptoms between the two groups. Fifteen women in the puncture group had cystoscopy during follow-up and none had bladder exposure. Level of the resident performing trocar passage was not associated with bladder puncture. CONCLUSIONS: Lower BMI and RP approach are associated with bladder puncture during MUS surgery. Bladder puncture is not associated with additional perioperative complications, long-term urinary storage/voiding sequelae, or delayed bladder sling exposure. Standardized training minimizes bladder punctures in trainees of all levels.

Naltrexone Implant for Opioid Use Disorder.

The continued rise in the availability of illicit opioids and opioid-related deaths in the United States has left physicians, researchers, and lawmakers desperate for solutions to this ongoing epidemic. The research into therapeutic options for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) began with the introduction of methadone in the 1960s. The approval of oral naltrexone initially showed much promise, as the drug was observed to be highly potent in antagonizing the effects of opioids while producing no opioid agonist effects of its own and having a favorable side effect profile. Patients that routinely take their naltrexone reported fewer days of heroin use and had more negative drug tests than those without treatment. Poor outcomes in OUD patients treated with naltrexone have been directly tied to short treatment time. Studies have shown that naltrexone given orally vs. as an implant at the 6-month interval showed a higher non-compliance rate among those who used oral medications at the 6-month mark and a slower return to use rate. There were concerns that naltrexone could possibly worsen negative symptoms seen in opiate use disorder related to blockade of endogenous opioids that are important for pleasurable stimuli. Studies have shown that naltrexone demonstrated no increase in levels of anxiety, depression and anhedonia in participants and another study found that those treated with naltrexone had a significant reduction in mental health-related hospitalizations. The latter study also concluded that there was no increased risk for mental health-related incidents in patients taking naltrexone via a long-acting implant. Although not yet FDA approved in the United States, naltrexone implant has shown promising results in Europe and Australia and may provide a novel treatment option for opioid addiction.