OBG Management is a leading publication in the ObGyn specialty addressing patient care and practice management under one cover.

Theme
medstat_obgm
Top Sections
Product Review
Expert Commentary
Clinical Review
obgm
Main menu
OBGM Main Menu
Explore menu
OBGM Explore Menu
Proclivity ID
18811001
Unpublish
Citation Name
OBG Manag
Specialty Focus
Obstetrics
Gynecology
Surgery
Negative Keywords
gaming
gambling
compulsive behaviors
ammunition
assault rifle
black jack
Boko Haram
bondage
child abuse
cocaine
Daech
drug paraphernalia
explosion
gun
human trafficking
ISIL
ISIS
Islamic caliphate
Islamic state
mixed martial arts
MMA
molestation
national rifle association
NRA
nsfw
pedophile
pedophilia
poker
porn
pornography
psychedelic drug
recreational drug
sex slave rings
slot machine
terrorism
terrorist
Texas hold 'em
UFC
substance abuse
abuseed
abuseer
abusees
abuseing
abusely
abuses
aeolus
aeolused
aeoluser
aeoluses
aeolusing
aeolusly
aeoluss
ahole
aholeed
aholeer
aholees
aholeing
aholely
aholes
alcohol
alcoholed
alcoholer
alcoholes
alcoholing
alcoholly
alcohols
allman
allmaned
allmaner
allmanes
allmaning
allmanly
allmans
alted
altes
alting
altly
alts
analed
analer
anales
analing
anally
analprobe
analprobeed
analprobeer
analprobees
analprobeing
analprobely
analprobes
anals
anilingus
anilingused
anilinguser
anilinguses
anilingusing
anilingusly
anilinguss
anus
anused
anuser
anuses
anusing
anusly
anuss
areola
areolaed
areolaer
areolaes
areolaing
areolaly
areolas
areole
areoleed
areoleer
areolees
areoleing
areolely
areoles
arian
arianed
arianer
arianes
arianing
arianly
arians
aryan
aryaned
aryaner
aryanes
aryaning
aryanly
aryans
asiaed
asiaer
asiaes
asiaing
asialy
asias
ass
ass hole
ass lick
ass licked
ass licker
ass lickes
ass licking
ass lickly
ass licks
assbang
assbanged
assbangeded
assbangeder
assbangedes
assbangeding
assbangedly
assbangeds
assbanger
assbanges
assbanging
assbangly
assbangs
assbangsed
assbangser
assbangses
assbangsing
assbangsly
assbangss
assed
asser
asses
assesed
asseser
asseses
assesing
assesly
assess
assfuck
assfucked
assfucker
assfuckered
assfuckerer
assfuckeres
assfuckering
assfuckerly
assfuckers
assfuckes
assfucking
assfuckly
assfucks
asshat
asshated
asshater
asshates
asshating
asshatly
asshats
assholeed
assholeer
assholees
assholeing
assholely
assholes
assholesed
assholeser
assholeses
assholesing
assholesly
assholess
assing
assly
assmaster
assmastered
assmasterer
assmasteres
assmastering
assmasterly
assmasters
assmunch
assmunched
assmuncher
assmunches
assmunching
assmunchly
assmunchs
asss
asswipe
asswipeed
asswipeer
asswipees
asswipeing
asswipely
asswipes
asswipesed
asswipeser
asswipeses
asswipesing
asswipesly
asswipess
azz
azzed
azzer
azzes
azzing
azzly
azzs
babeed
babeer
babees
babeing
babely
babes
babesed
babeser
babeses
babesing
babesly
babess
ballsac
ballsaced
ballsacer
ballsaces
ballsacing
ballsack
ballsacked
ballsacker
ballsackes
ballsacking
ballsackly
ballsacks
ballsacly
ballsacs
ballsed
ballser
ballses
ballsing
ballsly
ballss
barf
barfed
barfer
barfes
barfing
barfly
barfs
bastard
bastarded
bastarder
bastardes
bastarding
bastardly
bastards
bastardsed
bastardser
bastardses
bastardsing
bastardsly
bastardss
bawdy
bawdyed
bawdyer
bawdyes
bawdying
bawdyly
bawdys
beaner
beanered
beanerer
beaneres
beanering
beanerly
beaners
beardedclam
beardedclamed
beardedclamer
beardedclames
beardedclaming
beardedclamly
beardedclams
beastiality
beastialityed
beastialityer
beastialityes
beastialitying
beastialityly
beastialitys
beatch
beatched
beatcher
beatches
beatching
beatchly
beatchs
beater
beatered
beaterer
beateres
beatering
beaterly
beaters
beered
beerer
beeres
beering
beerly
beeyotch
beeyotched
beeyotcher
beeyotches
beeyotching
beeyotchly
beeyotchs
beotch
beotched
beotcher
beotches
beotching
beotchly
beotchs
biatch
biatched
biatcher
biatches
biatching
biatchly
biatchs
big tits
big titsed
big titser
big titses
big titsing
big titsly
big titss
bigtits
bigtitsed
bigtitser
bigtitses
bigtitsing
bigtitsly
bigtitss
bimbo
bimboed
bimboer
bimboes
bimboing
bimboly
bimbos
bisexualed
bisexualer
bisexuales
bisexualing
bisexually
bisexuals
bitch
bitched
bitcheded
bitcheder
bitchedes
bitcheding
bitchedly
bitcheds
bitcher
bitches
bitchesed
bitcheser
bitcheses
bitchesing
bitchesly
bitchess
bitching
bitchly
bitchs
bitchy
bitchyed
bitchyer
bitchyes
bitchying
bitchyly
bitchys
bleached
bleacher
bleaches
bleaching
bleachly
bleachs
blow job
blow jobed
blow jober
blow jobes
blow jobing
blow jobly
blow jobs
blowed
blower
blowes
blowing
blowjob
blowjobed
blowjober
blowjobes
blowjobing
blowjobly
blowjobs
blowjobsed
blowjobser
blowjobses
blowjobsing
blowjobsly
blowjobss
blowly
blows
boink
boinked
boinker
boinkes
boinking
boinkly
boinks
bollock
bollocked
bollocker
bollockes
bollocking
bollockly
bollocks
bollocksed
bollockser
bollockses
bollocksing
bollocksly
bollockss
bollok
bolloked
bolloker
bollokes
bolloking
bollokly
bolloks
boner
bonered
bonerer
boneres
bonering
bonerly
boners
bonersed
bonerser
bonerses
bonersing
bonersly
bonerss
bong
bonged
bonger
bonges
bonging
bongly
bongs
boob
boobed
boober
boobes
boobies
boobiesed
boobieser
boobieses
boobiesing
boobiesly
boobiess
boobing
boobly
boobs
boobsed
boobser
boobses
boobsing
boobsly
boobss
booby
boobyed
boobyer
boobyes
boobying
boobyly
boobys
booger
boogered
boogerer
boogeres
boogering
boogerly
boogers
bookie
bookieed
bookieer
bookiees
bookieing
bookiely
bookies
bootee
booteeed
booteeer
booteees
booteeing
booteely
bootees
bootie
bootieed
bootieer
bootiees
bootieing
bootiely
booties
booty
bootyed
bootyer
bootyes
bootying
bootyly
bootys
boozeed
boozeer
boozees
boozeing
boozely
boozer
boozered
boozerer
boozeres
boozering
boozerly
boozers
boozes
boozy
boozyed
boozyer
boozyes
boozying
boozyly
boozys
bosomed
bosomer
bosomes
bosoming
bosomly
bosoms
bosomy
bosomyed
bosomyer
bosomyes
bosomying
bosomyly
bosomys
bugger
buggered
buggerer
buggeres
buggering
buggerly
buggers
bukkake
bukkakeed
bukkakeer
bukkakees
bukkakeing
bukkakely
bukkakes
bull shit
bull shited
bull shiter
bull shites
bull shiting
bull shitly
bull shits
bullshit
bullshited
bullshiter
bullshites
bullshiting
bullshitly
bullshits
bullshitsed
bullshitser
bullshitses
bullshitsing
bullshitsly
bullshitss
bullshitted
bullshitteded
bullshitteder
bullshittedes
bullshitteding
bullshittedly
bullshitteds
bullturds
bullturdsed
bullturdser
bullturdses
bullturdsing
bullturdsly
bullturdss
bung
bunged
bunger
bunges
bunging
bungly
bungs
busty
bustyed
bustyer
bustyes
bustying
bustyly
bustys
butt
butt fuck
butt fucked
butt fucker
butt fuckes
butt fucking
butt fuckly
butt fucks
butted
buttes
buttfuck
buttfucked
buttfucker
buttfuckered
buttfuckerer
buttfuckeres
buttfuckering
buttfuckerly
buttfuckers
buttfuckes
buttfucking
buttfuckly
buttfucks
butting
buttly
buttplug
buttpluged
buttpluger
buttpluges
buttpluging
buttplugly
buttplugs
butts
caca
cacaed
cacaer
cacaes
cacaing
cacaly
cacas
cahone
cahoneed
cahoneer
cahonees
cahoneing
cahonely
cahones
cameltoe
cameltoeed
cameltoeer
cameltoees
cameltoeing
cameltoely
cameltoes
carpetmuncher
carpetmunchered
carpetmuncherer
carpetmuncheres
carpetmunchering
carpetmuncherly
carpetmunchers
cawk
cawked
cawker
cawkes
cawking
cawkly
cawks
chinc
chinced
chincer
chinces
chincing
chincly
chincs
chincsed
chincser
chincses
chincsing
chincsly
chincss
chink
chinked
chinker
chinkes
chinking
chinkly
chinks
chode
chodeed
chodeer
chodees
chodeing
chodely
chodes
chodesed
chodeser
chodeses
chodesing
chodesly
chodess
clit
clited
cliter
clites
cliting
clitly
clitoris
clitorised
clitoriser
clitorises
clitorising
clitorisly
clitoriss
clitorus
clitorused
clitoruser
clitoruses
clitorusing
clitorusly
clitoruss
clits
clitsed
clitser
clitses
clitsing
clitsly
clitss
clitty
clittyed
clittyer
clittyes
clittying
clittyly
clittys
cocain
cocaine
cocained
cocaineed
cocaineer
cocainees
cocaineing
cocainely
cocainer
cocaines
cocaining
cocainly
cocains
cock
cock sucker
cock suckered
cock suckerer
cock suckeres
cock suckering
cock suckerly
cock suckers
cockblock
cockblocked
cockblocker
cockblockes
cockblocking
cockblockly
cockblocks
cocked
cocker
cockes
cockholster
cockholstered
cockholsterer
cockholsteres
cockholstering
cockholsterly
cockholsters
cocking
cockknocker
cockknockered
cockknockerer
cockknockeres
cockknockering
cockknockerly
cockknockers
cockly
cocks
cocksed
cockser
cockses
cocksing
cocksly
cocksmoker
cocksmokered
cocksmokerer
cocksmokeres
cocksmokering
cocksmokerly
cocksmokers
cockss
cocksucker
cocksuckered
cocksuckerer
cocksuckeres
cocksuckering
cocksuckerly
cocksuckers
coital
coitaled
coitaler
coitales
coitaling
coitally
coitals
commie
commieed
commieer
commiees
commieing
commiely
commies
condomed
condomer
condomes
condoming
condomly
condoms
coon
cooned
cooner
coones
cooning
coonly
coons
coonsed
coonser
coonses
coonsing
coonsly
coonss
corksucker
corksuckered
corksuckerer
corksuckeres
corksuckering
corksuckerly
corksuckers
cracked
crackwhore
crackwhoreed
crackwhoreer
crackwhorees
crackwhoreing
crackwhorely
crackwhores
crap
craped
craper
crapes
craping
craply
crappy
crappyed
crappyer
crappyes
crappying
crappyly
crappys
cum
cumed
cumer
cumes
cuming
cumly
cummin
cummined
cumminer
cummines
cumming
cumminged
cumminger
cumminges
cumminging
cummingly
cummings
cummining
cumminly
cummins
cums
cumshot
cumshoted
cumshoter
cumshotes
cumshoting
cumshotly
cumshots
cumshotsed
cumshotser
cumshotses
cumshotsing
cumshotsly
cumshotss
cumslut
cumsluted
cumsluter
cumslutes
cumsluting
cumslutly
cumsluts
cumstain
cumstained
cumstainer
cumstaines
cumstaining
cumstainly
cumstains
cunilingus
cunilingused
cunilinguser
cunilinguses
cunilingusing
cunilingusly
cunilinguss
cunnilingus
cunnilingused
cunnilinguser
cunnilinguses
cunnilingusing
cunnilingusly
cunnilinguss
cunny
cunnyed
cunnyer
cunnyes
cunnying
cunnyly
cunnys
cunt
cunted
cunter
cuntes
cuntface
cuntfaceed
cuntfaceer
cuntfacees
cuntfaceing
cuntfacely
cuntfaces
cunthunter
cunthuntered
cunthunterer
cunthunteres
cunthuntering
cunthunterly
cunthunters
cunting
cuntlick
cuntlicked
cuntlicker
cuntlickered
cuntlickerer
cuntlickeres
cuntlickering
cuntlickerly
cuntlickers
cuntlickes
cuntlicking
cuntlickly
cuntlicks
cuntly
cunts
cuntsed
cuntser
cuntses
cuntsing
cuntsly
cuntss
dago
dagoed
dagoer
dagoes
dagoing
dagoly
dagos
dagosed
dagoser
dagoses
dagosing
dagosly
dagoss
dammit
dammited
dammiter
dammites
dammiting
dammitly
dammits
damn
damned
damneded
damneder
damnedes
damneding
damnedly
damneds
damner
damnes
damning
damnit
damnited
damniter
damnites
damniting
damnitly
damnits
damnly
damns
dick
dickbag
dickbaged
dickbager
dickbages
dickbaging
dickbagly
dickbags
dickdipper
dickdippered
dickdipperer
dickdipperes
dickdippering
dickdipperly
dickdippers
dicked
dicker
dickes
dickface
dickfaceed
dickfaceer
dickfacees
dickfaceing
dickfacely
dickfaces
dickflipper
dickflippered
dickflipperer
dickflipperes
dickflippering
dickflipperly
dickflippers
dickhead
dickheaded
dickheader
dickheades
dickheading
dickheadly
dickheads
dickheadsed
dickheadser
dickheadses
dickheadsing
dickheadsly
dickheadss
dicking
dickish
dickished
dickisher
dickishes
dickishing
dickishly
dickishs
dickly
dickripper
dickrippered
dickripperer
dickripperes
dickrippering
dickripperly
dickrippers
dicks
dicksipper
dicksippered
dicksipperer
dicksipperes
dicksippering
dicksipperly
dicksippers
dickweed
dickweeded
dickweeder
dickweedes
dickweeding
dickweedly
dickweeds
dickwhipper
dickwhippered
dickwhipperer
dickwhipperes
dickwhippering
dickwhipperly
dickwhippers
dickzipper
dickzippered
dickzipperer
dickzipperes
dickzippering
dickzipperly
dickzippers
diddle
diddleed
diddleer
diddlees
diddleing
diddlely
diddles
dike
dikeed
dikeer
dikees
dikeing
dikely
dikes
dildo
dildoed
dildoer
dildoes
dildoing
dildoly
dildos
dildosed
dildoser
dildoses
dildosing
dildosly
dildoss
diligaf
diligafed
diligafer
diligafes
diligafing
diligafly
diligafs
dillweed
dillweeded
dillweeder
dillweedes
dillweeding
dillweedly
dillweeds
dimwit
dimwited
dimwiter
dimwites
dimwiting
dimwitly
dimwits
dingle
dingleed
dingleer
dinglees
dingleing
dinglely
dingles
dipship
dipshiped
dipshiper
dipshipes
dipshiping
dipshiply
dipships
dizzyed
dizzyer
dizzyes
dizzying
dizzyly
dizzys
doggiestyleed
doggiestyleer
doggiestylees
doggiestyleing
doggiestylely
doggiestyles
doggystyleed
doggystyleer
doggystylees
doggystyleing
doggystylely
doggystyles
dong
donged
donger
donges
donging
dongly
dongs
doofus
doofused
doofuser
doofuses
doofusing
doofusly
doofuss
doosh
dooshed
doosher
dooshes
dooshing
dooshly
dooshs
dopeyed
dopeyer
dopeyes
dopeying
dopeyly
dopeys
douchebag
douchebaged
douchebager
douchebages
douchebaging
douchebagly
douchebags
douchebagsed
douchebagser
douchebagses
douchebagsing
douchebagsly
douchebagss
doucheed
doucheer
douchees
doucheing
douchely
douches
douchey
doucheyed
doucheyer
doucheyes
doucheying
doucheyly
doucheys
drunk
drunked
drunker
drunkes
drunking
drunkly
drunks
dumass
dumassed
dumasser
dumasses
dumassing
dumassly
dumasss
dumbass
dumbassed
dumbasser
dumbasses
dumbassesed
dumbasseser
dumbasseses
dumbassesing
dumbassesly
dumbassess
dumbassing
dumbassly
dumbasss
dummy
dummyed
dummyer
dummyes
dummying
dummyly
dummys
dyke
dykeed
dykeer
dykees
dykeing
dykely
dykes
dykesed
dykeser
dykeses
dykesing
dykesly
dykess
erotic
eroticed
eroticer
erotices
eroticing
eroticly
erotics
extacy
extacyed
extacyer
extacyes
extacying
extacyly
extacys
extasy
extasyed
extasyer
extasyes
extasying
extasyly
extasys
fack
facked
facker
fackes
facking
fackly
facks
fag
faged
fager
fages
fagg
fagged
faggeded
faggeder
faggedes
faggeding
faggedly
faggeds
fagger
fagges
fagging
faggit
faggited
faggiter
faggites
faggiting
faggitly
faggits
faggly
faggot
faggoted
faggoter
faggotes
faggoting
faggotly
faggots
faggs
faging
fagly
fagot
fagoted
fagoter
fagotes
fagoting
fagotly
fagots
fags
fagsed
fagser
fagses
fagsing
fagsly
fagss
faig
faiged
faiger
faiges
faiging
faigly
faigs
faigt
faigted
faigter
faigtes
faigting
faigtly
faigts
fannybandit
fannybandited
fannybanditer
fannybandites
fannybanditing
fannybanditly
fannybandits
farted
farter
fartes
farting
fartknocker
fartknockered
fartknockerer
fartknockeres
fartknockering
fartknockerly
fartknockers
fartly
farts
felch
felched
felcher
felchered
felcherer
felcheres
felchering
felcherly
felchers
felches
felching
felchinged
felchinger
felchinges
felchinging
felchingly
felchings
felchly
felchs
fellate
fellateed
fellateer
fellatees
fellateing
fellately
fellates
fellatio
fellatioed
fellatioer
fellatioes
fellatioing
fellatioly
fellatios
feltch
feltched
feltcher
feltchered
feltcherer
feltcheres
feltchering
feltcherly
feltchers
feltches
feltching
feltchly
feltchs
feom
feomed
feomer
feomes
feoming
feomly
feoms
fisted
fisteded
fisteder
fistedes
fisteding
fistedly
fisteds
fisting
fistinged
fistinger
fistinges
fistinging
fistingly
fistings
fisty
fistyed
fistyer
fistyes
fistying
fistyly
fistys
floozy
floozyed
floozyer
floozyes
floozying
floozyly
floozys
foad
foaded
foader
foades
foading
foadly
foads
fondleed
fondleer
fondlees
fondleing
fondlely
fondles
foobar
foobared
foobarer
foobares
foobaring
foobarly
foobars
freex
freexed
freexer
freexes
freexing
freexly
freexs
frigg
frigga
friggaed
friggaer
friggaes
friggaing
friggaly
friggas
frigged
frigger
frigges
frigging
friggly
friggs
fubar
fubared
fubarer
fubares
fubaring
fubarly
fubars
fuck
fuckass
fuckassed
fuckasser
fuckasses
fuckassing
fuckassly
fuckasss
fucked
fuckeded
fuckeder
fuckedes
fuckeding
fuckedly
fuckeds
fucker
fuckered
fuckerer
fuckeres
fuckering
fuckerly
fuckers
fuckes
fuckface
fuckfaceed
fuckfaceer
fuckfacees
fuckfaceing
fuckfacely
fuckfaces
fuckin
fuckined
fuckiner
fuckines
fucking
fuckinged
fuckinger
fuckinges
fuckinging
fuckingly
fuckings
fuckining
fuckinly
fuckins
fuckly
fucknugget
fucknuggeted
fucknuggeter
fucknuggetes
fucknuggeting
fucknuggetly
fucknuggets
fucknut
fucknuted
fucknuter
fucknutes
fucknuting
fucknutly
fucknuts
fuckoff
fuckoffed
fuckoffer
fuckoffes
fuckoffing
fuckoffly
fuckoffs
fucks
fucksed
fuckser
fuckses
fucksing
fucksly
fuckss
fucktard
fucktarded
fucktarder
fucktardes
fucktarding
fucktardly
fucktards
fuckup
fuckuped
fuckuper
fuckupes
fuckuping
fuckuply
fuckups
fuckwad
fuckwaded
fuckwader
fuckwades
fuckwading
fuckwadly
fuckwads
fuckwit
fuckwited
fuckwiter
fuckwites
fuckwiting
fuckwitly
fuckwits
fudgepacker
fudgepackered
fudgepackerer
fudgepackeres
fudgepackering
fudgepackerly
fudgepackers
fuk
fuked
fuker
fukes
fuking
fukly
fuks
fvck
fvcked
fvcker
fvckes
fvcking
fvckly
fvcks
fxck
fxcked
fxcker
fxckes
fxcking
fxckly
fxcks
gae
gaeed
gaeer
gaees
gaeing
gaely
gaes
gai
gaied
gaier
gaies
gaiing
gaily
gais
ganja
ganjaed
ganjaer
ganjaes
ganjaing
ganjaly
ganjas
gayed
gayer
gayes
gaying
gayly
gays
gaysed
gayser
gayses
gaysing
gaysly
gayss
gey
geyed
geyer
geyes
geying
geyly
geys
gfc
gfced
gfcer
gfces
gfcing
gfcly
gfcs
gfy
gfyed
gfyer
gfyes
gfying
gfyly
gfys
ghay
ghayed
ghayer
ghayes
ghaying
ghayly
ghays
ghey
gheyed
gheyer
gheyes
gheying
gheyly
gheys
gigolo
gigoloed
gigoloer
gigoloes
gigoloing
gigololy
gigolos
goatse
goatseed
goatseer
goatsees
goatseing
goatsely
goatses
godamn
godamned
godamner
godamnes
godamning
godamnit
godamnited
godamniter
godamnites
godamniting
godamnitly
godamnits
godamnly
godamns
goddam
goddamed
goddamer
goddames
goddaming
goddamly
goddammit
goddammited
goddammiter
goddammites
goddammiting
goddammitly
goddammits
goddamn
goddamned
goddamner
goddamnes
goddamning
goddamnly
goddamns
goddams
goldenshower
goldenshowered
goldenshowerer
goldenshoweres
goldenshowering
goldenshowerly
goldenshowers
gonad
gonaded
gonader
gonades
gonading
gonadly
gonads
gonadsed
gonadser
gonadses
gonadsing
gonadsly
gonadss
gook
gooked
gooker
gookes
gooking
gookly
gooks
gooksed
gookser
gookses
gooksing
gooksly
gookss
gringo
gringoed
gringoer
gringoes
gringoing
gringoly
gringos
gspot
gspoted
gspoter
gspotes
gspoting
gspotly
gspots
gtfo
gtfoed
gtfoer
gtfoes
gtfoing
gtfoly
gtfos
guido
guidoed
guidoer
guidoes
guidoing
guidoly
guidos
handjob
handjobed
handjober
handjobes
handjobing
handjobly
handjobs
hard on
hard oned
hard oner
hard ones
hard oning
hard only
hard ons
hardknight
hardknighted
hardknighter
hardknightes
hardknighting
hardknightly
hardknights
hebe
hebeed
hebeer
hebees
hebeing
hebely
hebes
heeb
heebed
heeber
heebes
heebing
heebly
heebs
hell
helled
heller
helles
helling
hellly
hells
hemp
hemped
hemper
hempes
hemping
hemply
hemps
heroined
heroiner
heroines
heroining
heroinly
heroins
herp
herped
herper
herpes
herpesed
herpeser
herpeses
herpesing
herpesly
herpess
herping
herply
herps
herpy
herpyed
herpyer
herpyes
herpying
herpyly
herpys
hitler
hitlered
hitlerer
hitleres
hitlering
hitlerly
hitlers
hived
hiver
hives
hiving
hivly
hivs
hobag
hobaged
hobager
hobages
hobaging
hobagly
hobags
homey
homeyed
homeyer
homeyes
homeying
homeyly
homeys
homo
homoed
homoer
homoes
homoey
homoeyed
homoeyer
homoeyes
homoeying
homoeyly
homoeys
homoing
homoly
homos
honky
honkyed
honkyer
honkyes
honkying
honkyly
honkys
hooch
hooched
hoocher
hooches
hooching
hoochly
hoochs
hookah
hookahed
hookaher
hookahes
hookahing
hookahly
hookahs
hooker
hookered
hookerer
hookeres
hookering
hookerly
hookers
hoor
hoored
hoorer
hoores
hooring
hoorly
hoors
hootch
hootched
hootcher
hootches
hootching
hootchly
hootchs
hooter
hootered
hooterer
hooteres
hootering
hooterly
hooters
hootersed
hooterser
hooterses
hootersing
hootersly
hooterss
horny
hornyed
hornyer
hornyes
hornying
hornyly
hornys
houstoned
houstoner
houstones
houstoning
houstonly
houstons
hump
humped
humpeded
humpeder
humpedes
humpeding
humpedly
humpeds
humper
humpes
humping
humpinged
humpinger
humpinges
humpinging
humpingly
humpings
humply
humps
husbanded
husbander
husbandes
husbanding
husbandly
husbands
hussy
hussyed
hussyer
hussyes
hussying
hussyly
hussys
hymened
hymener
hymenes
hymening
hymenly
hymens
inbred
inbreded
inbreder
inbredes
inbreding
inbredly
inbreds
incest
incested
incester
incestes
incesting
incestly
incests
injun
injuned
injuner
injunes
injuning
injunly
injuns
jackass
jackassed
jackasser
jackasses
jackassing
jackassly
jackasss
jackhole
jackholeed
jackholeer
jackholees
jackholeing
jackholely
jackholes
jackoff
jackoffed
jackoffer
jackoffes
jackoffing
jackoffly
jackoffs
jap
japed
japer
japes
japing
japly
japs
japsed
japser
japses
japsing
japsly
japss
jerkoff
jerkoffed
jerkoffer
jerkoffes
jerkoffing
jerkoffly
jerkoffs
jerks
jism
jismed
jismer
jismes
jisming
jismly
jisms
jiz
jized
jizer
jizes
jizing
jizly
jizm
jizmed
jizmer
jizmes
jizming
jizmly
jizms
jizs
jizz
jizzed
jizzeded
jizzeder
jizzedes
jizzeding
jizzedly
jizzeds
jizzer
jizzes
jizzing
jizzly
jizzs
junkie
junkieed
junkieer
junkiees
junkieing
junkiely
junkies
junky
junkyed
junkyer
junkyes
junkying
junkyly
junkys
kike
kikeed
kikeer
kikees
kikeing
kikely
kikes
kikesed
kikeser
kikeses
kikesing
kikesly
kikess
killed
killer
killes
killing
killly
kills
kinky
kinkyed
kinkyer
kinkyes
kinkying
kinkyly
kinkys
kkk
kkked
kkker
kkkes
kkking
kkkly
kkks
klan
klaned
klaner
klanes
klaning
klanly
klans
knobend
knobended
knobender
knobendes
knobending
knobendly
knobends
kooch
kooched
koocher
kooches
koochesed
koocheser
koocheses
koochesing
koochesly
koochess
kooching
koochly
koochs
kootch
kootched
kootcher
kootches
kootching
kootchly
kootchs
kraut
krauted
krauter
krautes
krauting
krautly
krauts
kyke
kykeed
kykeer
kykees
kykeing
kykely
kykes
lech
leched
lecher
leches
leching
lechly
lechs
leper
lepered
leperer
leperes
lepering
leperly
lepers
lesbiansed
lesbianser
lesbianses
lesbiansing
lesbiansly
lesbianss
lesbo
lesboed
lesboer
lesboes
lesboing
lesboly
lesbos
lesbosed
lesboser
lesboses
lesbosing
lesbosly
lesboss
lez
lezbianed
lezbianer
lezbianes
lezbianing
lezbianly
lezbians
lezbiansed
lezbianser
lezbianses
lezbiansing
lezbiansly
lezbianss
lezbo
lezboed
lezboer
lezboes
lezboing
lezboly
lezbos
lezbosed
lezboser
lezboses
lezbosing
lezbosly
lezboss
lezed
lezer
lezes
lezing
lezly
lezs
lezzie
lezzieed
lezzieer
lezziees
lezzieing
lezziely
lezzies
lezziesed
lezzieser
lezzieses
lezziesing
lezziesly
lezziess
lezzy
lezzyed
lezzyer
lezzyes
lezzying
lezzyly
lezzys
lmaoed
lmaoer
lmaoes
lmaoing
lmaoly
lmaos
lmfao
lmfaoed
lmfaoer
lmfaoes
lmfaoing
lmfaoly
lmfaos
loined
loiner
loines
loining
loinly
loins
loinsed
loinser
loinses
loinsing
loinsly
loinss
lubeed
lubeer
lubees
lubeing
lubely
lubes
lusty
lustyed
lustyer
lustyes
lustying
lustyly
lustys
massa
massaed
massaer
massaes
massaing
massaly
massas
masterbate
masterbateed
masterbateer
masterbatees
masterbateing
masterbately
masterbates
masterbating
masterbatinged
masterbatinger
masterbatinges
masterbatinging
masterbatingly
masterbatings
masterbation
masterbationed
masterbationer
masterbationes
masterbationing
masterbationly
masterbations
masturbate
masturbateed
masturbateer
masturbatees
masturbateing
masturbately
masturbates
masturbating
masturbatinged
masturbatinger
masturbatinges
masturbatinging
masturbatingly
masturbatings
masturbation
masturbationed
masturbationer
masturbationes
masturbationing
masturbationly
masturbations
methed
mether
methes
mething
methly
meths
militaryed
militaryer
militaryes
militarying
militaryly
militarys
mofo
mofoed
mofoer
mofoes
mofoing
mofoly
mofos
molest
molested
molester
molestes
molesting
molestly
molests
moolie
moolieed
moolieer
mooliees
moolieing
mooliely
moolies
moron
moroned
moroner
morones
moroning
moronly
morons
motherfucka
motherfuckaed
motherfuckaer
motherfuckaes
motherfuckaing
motherfuckaly
motherfuckas
motherfucker
motherfuckered
motherfuckerer
motherfuckeres
motherfuckering
motherfuckerly
motherfuckers
motherfucking
motherfuckinged
motherfuckinger
motherfuckinges
motherfuckinging
motherfuckingly
motherfuckings
mtherfucker
mtherfuckered
mtherfuckerer
mtherfuckeres
mtherfuckering
mtherfuckerly
mtherfuckers
mthrfucker
mthrfuckered
mthrfuckerer
mthrfuckeres
mthrfuckering
mthrfuckerly
mthrfuckers
mthrfucking
mthrfuckinged
mthrfuckinger
mthrfuckinges
mthrfuckinging
mthrfuckingly
mthrfuckings
muff
muffdiver
muffdivered
muffdiverer
muffdiveres
muffdivering
muffdiverly
muffdivers
muffed
muffer
muffes
muffing
muffly
muffs
murdered
murderer
murderes
murdering
murderly
murders
muthafuckaz
muthafuckazed
muthafuckazer
muthafuckazes
muthafuckazing
muthafuckazly
muthafuckazs
muthafucker
muthafuckered
muthafuckerer
muthafuckeres
muthafuckering
muthafuckerly
muthafuckers
mutherfucker
mutherfuckered
mutherfuckerer
mutherfuckeres
mutherfuckering
mutherfuckerly
mutherfuckers
mutherfucking
mutherfuckinged
mutherfuckinger
mutherfuckinges
mutherfuckinging
mutherfuckingly
mutherfuckings
muthrfucking
muthrfuckinged
muthrfuckinger
muthrfuckinges
muthrfuckinging
muthrfuckingly
muthrfuckings
nad
naded
nader
nades
nading
nadly
nads
nadsed
nadser
nadses
nadsing
nadsly
nadss
nakeded
nakeder
nakedes
nakeding
nakedly
nakeds
napalm
napalmed
napalmer
napalmes
napalming
napalmly
napalms
nappy
nappyed
nappyer
nappyes
nappying
nappyly
nappys
nazi
nazied
nazier
nazies
naziing
nazily
nazis
nazism
nazismed
nazismer
nazismes
nazisming
nazismly
nazisms
negro
negroed
negroer
negroes
negroing
negroly
negros
nigga
niggaed
niggaer
niggaes
niggah
niggahed
niggaher
niggahes
niggahing
niggahly
niggahs
niggaing
niggaly
niggas
niggased
niggaser
niggases
niggasing
niggasly
niggass
niggaz
niggazed
niggazer
niggazes
niggazing
niggazly
niggazs
nigger
niggered
niggerer
niggeres
niggering
niggerly
niggers
niggersed
niggerser
niggerses
niggersing
niggersly
niggerss
niggle
niggleed
niggleer
nigglees
niggleing
nigglely
niggles
niglet
nigleted
nigleter
nigletes
nigleting
nigletly
niglets
nimrod
nimroded
nimroder
nimrodes
nimroding
nimrodly
nimrods
ninny
ninnyed
ninnyer
ninnyes
ninnying
ninnyly
ninnys
nooky
nookyed
nookyer
nookyes
nookying
nookyly
nookys
nuccitelli
nuccitellied
nuccitellier
nuccitellies
nuccitelliing
nuccitellily
nuccitellis
nympho
nymphoed
nymphoer
nymphoes
nymphoing
nympholy
nymphos
opium
opiumed
opiumer
opiumes
opiuming
opiumly
opiums
orgies
orgiesed
orgieser
orgieses
orgiesing
orgiesly
orgiess
orgy
orgyed
orgyer
orgyes
orgying
orgyly
orgys
paddy
paddyed
paddyer
paddyes
paddying
paddyly
paddys
paki
pakied
pakier
pakies
pakiing
pakily
pakis
pantie
pantieed
pantieer
pantiees
pantieing
pantiely
panties
pantiesed
pantieser
pantieses
pantiesing
pantiesly
pantiess
panty
pantyed
pantyer
pantyes
pantying
pantyly
pantys
pastie
pastieed
pastieer
pastiees
pastieing
pastiely
pasties
pasty
pastyed
pastyer
pastyes
pastying
pastyly
pastys
pecker
peckered
peckerer
peckeres
peckering
peckerly
peckers
pedo
pedoed
pedoer
pedoes
pedoing
pedoly
pedophile
pedophileed
pedophileer
pedophilees
pedophileing
pedophilely
pedophiles
pedophilia
pedophiliac
pedophiliaced
pedophiliacer
pedophiliaces
pedophiliacing
pedophiliacly
pedophiliacs
pedophiliaed
pedophiliaer
pedophiliaes
pedophiliaing
pedophilialy
pedophilias
pedos
penial
penialed
penialer
peniales
penialing
penially
penials
penile
penileed
penileer
penilees
penileing
penilely
peniles
penis
penised
peniser
penises
penising
penisly
peniss
perversion
perversioned
perversioner
perversiones
perversioning
perversionly
perversions
peyote
peyoteed
peyoteer
peyotees
peyoteing
peyotely
peyotes
phuck
phucked
phucker
phuckes
phucking
phuckly
phucks
pillowbiter
pillowbitered
pillowbiterer
pillowbiteres
pillowbitering
pillowbiterly
pillowbiters
pimp
pimped
pimper
pimpes
pimping
pimply
pimps
pinko
pinkoed
pinkoer
pinkoes
pinkoing
pinkoly
pinkos
pissed
pisseded
pisseder
pissedes
pisseding
pissedly
pisseds
pisser
pisses
pissing
pissly
pissoff
pissoffed
pissoffer
pissoffes
pissoffing
pissoffly
pissoffs
pisss
polack
polacked
polacker
polackes
polacking
polackly
polacks
pollock
pollocked
pollocker
pollockes
pollocking
pollockly
pollocks
poon
pooned
pooner
poones
pooning
poonly
poons
poontang
poontanged
poontanger
poontanges
poontanging
poontangly
poontangs
porn
porned
porner
pornes
porning
pornly
porno
pornoed
pornoer
pornoes
pornography
pornographyed
pornographyer
pornographyes
pornographying
pornographyly
pornographys
pornoing
pornoly
pornos
porns
prick
pricked
pricker
prickes
pricking
prickly
pricks
prig
priged
priger
priges
priging
prigly
prigs
prostitute
prostituteed
prostituteer
prostitutees
prostituteing
prostitutely
prostitutes
prude
prudeed
prudeer
prudees
prudeing
prudely
prudes
punkass
punkassed
punkasser
punkasses
punkassing
punkassly
punkasss
punky
punkyed
punkyer
punkyes
punkying
punkyly
punkys
puss
pussed
pusser
pusses
pussies
pussiesed
pussieser
pussieses
pussiesing
pussiesly
pussiess
pussing
pussly
pusss
pussy
pussyed
pussyer
pussyes
pussying
pussyly
pussypounder
pussypoundered
pussypounderer
pussypounderes
pussypoundering
pussypounderly
pussypounders
pussys
puto
putoed
putoer
putoes
putoing
putoly
putos
queaf
queafed
queafer
queafes
queafing
queafly
queafs
queef
queefed
queefer
queefes
queefing
queefly
queefs
queer
queered
queerer
queeres
queering
queerly
queero
queeroed
queeroer
queeroes
queeroing
queeroly
queeros
queers
queersed
queerser
queerses
queersing
queersly
queerss
quicky
quickyed
quickyer
quickyes
quickying
quickyly
quickys
quim
quimed
quimer
quimes
quiming
quimly
quims
racy
racyed
racyer
racyes
racying
racyly
racys
rape
raped
rapeded
rapeder
rapedes
rapeding
rapedly
rapeds
rapeed
rapeer
rapees
rapeing
rapely
raper
rapered
raperer
raperes
rapering
raperly
rapers
rapes
rapist
rapisted
rapister
rapistes
rapisting
rapistly
rapists
raunch
raunched
rauncher
raunches
raunching
raunchly
raunchs
rectus
rectused
rectuser
rectuses
rectusing
rectusly
rectuss
reefer
reefered
reeferer
reeferes
reefering
reeferly
reefers
reetard
reetarded
reetarder
reetardes
reetarding
reetardly
reetards
reich
reiched
reicher
reiches
reiching
reichly
reichs
retard
retarded
retardeded
retardeder
retardedes
retardeding
retardedly
retardeds
retarder
retardes
retarding
retardly
retards
rimjob
rimjobed
rimjober
rimjobes
rimjobing
rimjobly
rimjobs
ritard
ritarded
ritarder
ritardes
ritarding
ritardly
ritards
rtard
rtarded
rtarder
rtardes
rtarding
rtardly
rtards
rum
rumed
rumer
rumes
ruming
rumly
rump
rumped
rumper
rumpes
rumping
rumply
rumprammer
rumprammered
rumprammerer
rumprammeres
rumprammering
rumprammerly
rumprammers
rumps
rums
ruski
ruskied
ruskier
ruskies
ruskiing
ruskily
ruskis
sadism
sadismed
sadismer
sadismes
sadisming
sadismly
sadisms
sadist
sadisted
sadister
sadistes
sadisting
sadistly
sadists
scag
scaged
scager
scages
scaging
scagly
scags
scantily
scantilyed
scantilyer
scantilyes
scantilying
scantilyly
scantilys
schlong
schlonged
schlonger
schlonges
schlonging
schlongly
schlongs
scrog
scroged
scroger
scroges
scroging
scrogly
scrogs
scrot
scrote
scroted
scroteed
scroteer
scrotees
scroteing
scrotely
scroter
scrotes
scroting
scrotly
scrots
scrotum
scrotumed
scrotumer
scrotumes
scrotuming
scrotumly
scrotums
scrud
scruded
scruder
scrudes
scruding
scrudly
scruds
scum
scumed
scumer
scumes
scuming
scumly
scums
seaman
seamaned
seamaner
seamanes
seamaning
seamanly
seamans
seamen
seamened
seamener
seamenes
seamening
seamenly
seamens
seduceed
seduceer
seducees
seduceing
seducely
seduces
semen
semened
semener
semenes
semening
semenly
semens
shamedame
shamedameed
shamedameer
shamedamees
shamedameing
shamedamely
shamedames
shit
shite
shiteater
shiteatered
shiteaterer
shiteateres
shiteatering
shiteaterly
shiteaters
shited
shiteed
shiteer
shitees
shiteing
shitely
shiter
shites
shitface
shitfaceed
shitfaceer
shitfacees
shitfaceing
shitfacely
shitfaces
shithead
shitheaded
shitheader
shitheades
shitheading
shitheadly
shitheads
shithole
shitholeed
shitholeer
shitholees
shitholeing
shitholely
shitholes
shithouse
shithouseed
shithouseer
shithousees
shithouseing
shithousely
shithouses
shiting
shitly
shits
shitsed
shitser
shitses
shitsing
shitsly
shitss
shitt
shitted
shitteded
shitteder
shittedes
shitteding
shittedly
shitteds
shitter
shittered
shitterer
shitteres
shittering
shitterly
shitters
shittes
shitting
shittly
shitts
shitty
shittyed
shittyer
shittyes
shittying
shittyly
shittys
shiz
shized
shizer
shizes
shizing
shizly
shizs
shooted
shooter
shootes
shooting
shootly
shoots
sissy
sissyed
sissyer
sissyes
sissying
sissyly
sissys
skag
skaged
skager
skages
skaging
skagly
skags
skank
skanked
skanker
skankes
skanking
skankly
skanks
slave
slaveed
slaveer
slavees
slaveing
slavely
slaves
sleaze
sleazeed
sleazeer
sleazees
sleazeing
sleazely
sleazes
sleazy
sleazyed
sleazyer
sleazyes
sleazying
sleazyly
sleazys
slut
slutdumper
slutdumpered
slutdumperer
slutdumperes
slutdumpering
slutdumperly
slutdumpers
sluted
sluter
slutes
sluting
slutkiss
slutkissed
slutkisser
slutkisses
slutkissing
slutkissly
slutkisss
slutly
sluts
slutsed
slutser
slutses
slutsing
slutsly
slutss
smegma
smegmaed
smegmaer
smegmaes
smegmaing
smegmaly
smegmas
smut
smuted
smuter
smutes
smuting
smutly
smuts
smutty
smuttyed
smuttyer
smuttyes
smuttying
smuttyly
smuttys
snatch
snatched
snatcher
snatches
snatching
snatchly
snatchs
sniper
snipered
sniperer
sniperes
snipering
sniperly
snipers
snort
snorted
snorter
snortes
snorting
snortly
snorts
snuff
snuffed
snuffer
snuffes
snuffing
snuffly
snuffs
sodom
sodomed
sodomer
sodomes
sodoming
sodomly
sodoms
spic
spiced
spicer
spices
spicing
spick
spicked
spicker
spickes
spicking
spickly
spicks
spicly
spics
spik
spoof
spoofed
spoofer
spoofes
spoofing
spoofly
spoofs
spooge
spoogeed
spoogeer
spoogees
spoogeing
spoogely
spooges
spunk
spunked
spunker
spunkes
spunking
spunkly
spunks
steamyed
steamyer
steamyes
steamying
steamyly
steamys
stfu
stfued
stfuer
stfues
stfuing
stfuly
stfus
stiffy
stiffyed
stiffyer
stiffyes
stiffying
stiffyly
stiffys
stoneded
stoneder
stonedes
stoneding
stonedly
stoneds
stupided
stupider
stupides
stupiding
stupidly
stupids
suckeded
suckeder
suckedes
suckeding
suckedly
suckeds
sucker
suckes
sucking
suckinged
suckinger
suckinges
suckinging
suckingly
suckings
suckly
sucks
sumofabiatch
sumofabiatched
sumofabiatcher
sumofabiatches
sumofabiatching
sumofabiatchly
sumofabiatchs
tard
tarded
tarder
tardes
tarding
tardly
tards
tawdry
tawdryed
tawdryer
tawdryes
tawdrying
tawdryly
tawdrys
teabagging
teabagginged
teabagginger
teabagginges
teabagginging
teabaggingly
teabaggings
terd
terded
terder
terdes
terding
terdly
terds
teste
testee
testeed
testeeed
testeeer
testeees
testeeing
testeely
testeer
testees
testeing
testely
testes
testesed
testeser
testeses
testesing
testesly
testess
testicle
testicleed
testicleer
testiclees
testicleing
testiclely
testicles
testis
testised
testiser
testises
testising
testisly
testiss
thrusted
thruster
thrustes
thrusting
thrustly
thrusts
thug
thuged
thuger
thuges
thuging
thugly
thugs
tinkle
tinkleed
tinkleer
tinklees
tinkleing
tinklely
tinkles
tit
tited
titer
tites
titfuck
titfucked
titfucker
titfuckes
titfucking
titfuckly
titfucks
titi
titied
titier
tities
titiing
titily
titing
titis
titly
tits
titsed
titser
titses
titsing
titsly
titss
tittiefucker
tittiefuckered
tittiefuckerer
tittiefuckeres
tittiefuckering
tittiefuckerly
tittiefuckers
titties
tittiesed
tittieser
tittieses
tittiesing
tittiesly
tittiess
titty
tittyed
tittyer
tittyes
tittyfuck
tittyfucked
tittyfucker
tittyfuckered
tittyfuckerer
tittyfuckeres
tittyfuckering
tittyfuckerly
tittyfuckers
tittyfuckes
tittyfucking
tittyfuckly
tittyfucks
tittying
tittyly
tittys
toke
tokeed
tokeer
tokees
tokeing
tokely
tokes
toots
tootsed
tootser
tootses
tootsing
tootsly
tootss
tramp
tramped
tramper
trampes
tramping
tramply
tramps
transsexualed
transsexualer
transsexuales
transsexualing
transsexually
transsexuals
trashy
trashyed
trashyer
trashyes
trashying
trashyly
trashys
tubgirl
tubgirled
tubgirler
tubgirles
tubgirling
tubgirlly
tubgirls
turd
turded
turder
turdes
turding
turdly
turds
tush
tushed
tusher
tushes
tushing
tushly
tushs
twat
twated
twater
twates
twating
twatly
twats
twatsed
twatser
twatses
twatsing
twatsly
twatss
undies
undiesed
undieser
undieses
undiesing
undiesly
undiess
unweded
unweder
unwedes
unweding
unwedly
unweds
uzi
uzied
uzier
uzies
uziing
uzily
uzis
vag
vaged
vager
vages
vaging
vagly
vags
valium
valiumed
valiumer
valiumes
valiuming
valiumly
valiums
venous
virgined
virginer
virgines
virgining
virginly
virgins
vixen
vixened
vixener
vixenes
vixening
vixenly
vixens
vodkaed
vodkaer
vodkaes
vodkaing
vodkaly
vodkas
voyeur
voyeured
voyeurer
voyeures
voyeuring
voyeurly
voyeurs
vulgar
vulgared
vulgarer
vulgares
vulgaring
vulgarly
vulgars
wang
wanged
wanger
wanges
wanging
wangly
wangs
wank
wanked
wanker
wankered
wankerer
wankeres
wankering
wankerly
wankers
wankes
wanking
wankly
wanks
wazoo
wazooed
wazooer
wazooes
wazooing
wazooly
wazoos
wedgie
wedgieed
wedgieer
wedgiees
wedgieing
wedgiely
wedgies
weeded
weeder
weedes
weeding
weedly
weeds
weenie
weenieed
weenieer
weeniees
weenieing
weeniely
weenies
weewee
weeweeed
weeweeer
weeweees
weeweeing
weeweely
weewees
weiner
weinered
weinerer
weineres
weinering
weinerly
weiners
weirdo
weirdoed
weirdoer
weirdoes
weirdoing
weirdoly
weirdos
wench
wenched
wencher
wenches
wenching
wenchly
wenchs
wetback
wetbacked
wetbacker
wetbackes
wetbacking
wetbackly
wetbacks
whitey
whiteyed
whiteyer
whiteyes
whiteying
whiteyly
whiteys
whiz
whized
whizer
whizes
whizing
whizly
whizs
whoralicious
whoralicioused
whoraliciouser
whoraliciouses
whoraliciousing
whoraliciously
whoraliciouss
whore
whorealicious
whorealicioused
whorealiciouser
whorealiciouses
whorealiciousing
whorealiciously
whorealiciouss
whored
whoreded
whoreder
whoredes
whoreding
whoredly
whoreds
whoreed
whoreer
whorees
whoreface
whorefaceed
whorefaceer
whorefacees
whorefaceing
whorefacely
whorefaces
whorehopper
whorehoppered
whorehopperer
whorehopperes
whorehoppering
whorehopperly
whorehoppers
whorehouse
whorehouseed
whorehouseer
whorehousees
whorehouseing
whorehousely
whorehouses
whoreing
whorely
whores
whoresed
whoreser
whoreses
whoresing
whoresly
whoress
whoring
whoringed
whoringer
whoringes
whoringing
whoringly
whorings
wigger
wiggered
wiggerer
wiggeres
wiggering
wiggerly
wiggers
woody
woodyed
woodyer
woodyes
woodying
woodyly
woodys
wop
woped
woper
wopes
woping
woply
wops
wtf
wtfed
wtfer
wtfes
wtfing
wtfly
wtfs
xxx
xxxed
xxxer
xxxes
xxxing
xxxly
xxxs
yeasty
yeastyed
yeastyer
yeastyes
yeastying
yeastyly
yeastys
yobbo
yobboed
yobboer
yobboes
yobboing
yobboly
yobbos
zoophile
zoophileed
zoophileer
zoophilees
zoophileing
zoophilely
zoophiles
anal
ass
ass lick
balls
ballsac
bisexual
bleach
causas
cheap
cost of miracles
cunt
display network stats
fart
fda and death
fda AND warn
fda AND warning
fda AND warns
feom
fuck
gfc
humira AND expensive
illegal
madvocate
masturbation
nuccitelli
overdose
porn
shit
snort
texarkana
Altmetric
DSM Affiliated
Display in offset block
Disqus Exclude
Best Practices
CE/CME
Education Center
Medical Education Library
Enable Disqus
Display Author and Disclosure Link
Publication Type
Clinical
Slot System
Top 25
Disable Sticky Ads
Disable Ad Block Mitigation
Featured Buckets Admin
Publication LayerRX Default ID
795
Non-Overridden Topics
Show Ads on this Publication's Homepage
Consolidated Pub
Show Article Page Numbers on TOC

“Cogwheel” and other signs of hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
“Cogwheel” and other signs of hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts
Third of 4 parts on cystic adnexal pathology

Ultrasonography is the preferred imaging method to evaluate most adnexal cysts. Most types of pelvic cyst pathology have characteristic findings that, when identified, can guide counseling and management decisions. For instance, simple cysts have thin walls, are uniformly hypoechoic, and show no blood flow on color Doppler. Endometriomas, on the other hand, demonstrate diffuse, low-level internal echoes on ultrasonography.

In parts 1 and 2 of this 4-part series on adnexal pathology, we presented images detailing common benign adnexal cysts, including:

In this part 3, we detail imaging for hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts. In part 4 we will consider cystadenomas and ovarian neoplasias.

hydrosalpinx

These cysts are caused by fimbrial obstruction and result in tubal distention with serous fluid. A hydrosalpinx may occur following an episode of salpingitis or pelvic surgery.

Sonographic features diagnostic for hydrosalpinx include a tubular or S-shaped cystic mass separate from the ovary, with:

  • “beads on a string” or “cogwheel” appearance (small round nodules less than 3 mm in size that represent endosalpingeal folds when viewed in cross section)
  • “waist sign” (indentations on opposite sides)
  • incomplete septations, which result from segments of distended tube folding over/adhering to other tubal segments

Levine and colleagues noted that 3-dimensional imaging may be helpful when the diagnosis is uncertain.1

When a mass is noted that has features classic for hydrosalpinx, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound 2010 Consensus Conference Statement recommends1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis
  • frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 1 through 6 below (slides of image collections), we present 5 cases, including one of a 45-year-old patient presenting with chronic pelvic pain who was found to have bilateral hydrosalginges and right-sided tubo-ovarian complex.

pelvic inclusion cysts

Pelvic/peritoneal inclusion cysts, or peritoneal pseudocysts, are typically associated with factors that increase the risk for pelvic adhesive disease (including endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, or prior pelvic surgery).

Classic sonographic features of pelvic inclusion cysts are:

  • cystic mass, usually with septations/loculations
  • the mass follows the contour of adjacent organs
  • ovary at edge of the mass or sometimes suspended within it
  • with or without flow in septation on color Doppler

When a mass is noted that has features classic for a peritoneal inclusion cyst, the US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound recommends that1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis (although further imaging may be needed if the diagnosis is uncertain)
  • the frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 7 through 22 below (slides of image collections), we present several cases that demonstrate pelvic inclusion cysts on imaging. One case involves a 25-year-old patient presenting for 2- and 3-dimensional pelvic imaging due to infertility. She had a history of laparoscopic left ovarian cystectomy, right paratubal cystectomy, and lysis of adhesions. She was found to have a pelvic inclusion cyst and an endometrioma in the left ovary.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

References

Reference

1. Levine D, Brown DL, Andreotti RF, et al. Management of asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Ultrasound Q. 2010;26(3):121−131.

Author and Disclosure Information

Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan, MD, and Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD

Dr. Ozcan is Assistant Professor and Associate Program Director, Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville.

Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan MD, Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, Images in GYN ultrasound, pelvic inclusion cysts, hydrosalpinx, US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound, pelvic pain, pelvic cysts
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan, MD, and Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD

Dr. Ozcan is Assistant Professor and Associate Program Director, Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville.

Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan, MD, and Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD

Dr. Ozcan is Assistant Professor and Associate Program Director, Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville.

Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at the University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Related Articles
Third of 4 parts on cystic adnexal pathology
Third of 4 parts on cystic adnexal pathology

Ultrasonography is the preferred imaging method to evaluate most adnexal cysts. Most types of pelvic cyst pathology have characteristic findings that, when identified, can guide counseling and management decisions. For instance, simple cysts have thin walls, are uniformly hypoechoic, and show no blood flow on color Doppler. Endometriomas, on the other hand, demonstrate diffuse, low-level internal echoes on ultrasonography.

In parts 1 and 2 of this 4-part series on adnexal pathology, we presented images detailing common benign adnexal cysts, including:

In this part 3, we detail imaging for hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts. In part 4 we will consider cystadenomas and ovarian neoplasias.

hydrosalpinx

These cysts are caused by fimbrial obstruction and result in tubal distention with serous fluid. A hydrosalpinx may occur following an episode of salpingitis or pelvic surgery.

Sonographic features diagnostic for hydrosalpinx include a tubular or S-shaped cystic mass separate from the ovary, with:

  • “beads on a string” or “cogwheel” appearance (small round nodules less than 3 mm in size that represent endosalpingeal folds when viewed in cross section)
  • “waist sign” (indentations on opposite sides)
  • incomplete septations, which result from segments of distended tube folding over/adhering to other tubal segments

Levine and colleagues noted that 3-dimensional imaging may be helpful when the diagnosis is uncertain.1

When a mass is noted that has features classic for hydrosalpinx, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound 2010 Consensus Conference Statement recommends1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis
  • frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 1 through 6 below (slides of image collections), we present 5 cases, including one of a 45-year-old patient presenting with chronic pelvic pain who was found to have bilateral hydrosalginges and right-sided tubo-ovarian complex.

pelvic inclusion cysts

Pelvic/peritoneal inclusion cysts, or peritoneal pseudocysts, are typically associated with factors that increase the risk for pelvic adhesive disease (including endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, or prior pelvic surgery).

Classic sonographic features of pelvic inclusion cysts are:

  • cystic mass, usually with septations/loculations
  • the mass follows the contour of adjacent organs
  • ovary at edge of the mass or sometimes suspended within it
  • with or without flow in septation on color Doppler

When a mass is noted that has features classic for a peritoneal inclusion cyst, the US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound recommends that1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis (although further imaging may be needed if the diagnosis is uncertain)
  • the frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 7 through 22 below (slides of image collections), we present several cases that demonstrate pelvic inclusion cysts on imaging. One case involves a 25-year-old patient presenting for 2- and 3-dimensional pelvic imaging due to infertility. She had a history of laparoscopic left ovarian cystectomy, right paratubal cystectomy, and lysis of adhesions. She was found to have a pelvic inclusion cyst and an endometrioma in the left ovary.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

Ultrasonography is the preferred imaging method to evaluate most adnexal cysts. Most types of pelvic cyst pathology have characteristic findings that, when identified, can guide counseling and management decisions. For instance, simple cysts have thin walls, are uniformly hypoechoic, and show no blood flow on color Doppler. Endometriomas, on the other hand, demonstrate diffuse, low-level internal echoes on ultrasonography.

In parts 1 and 2 of this 4-part series on adnexal pathology, we presented images detailing common benign adnexal cysts, including:

In this part 3, we detail imaging for hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts. In part 4 we will consider cystadenomas and ovarian neoplasias.

hydrosalpinx

These cysts are caused by fimbrial obstruction and result in tubal distention with serous fluid. A hydrosalpinx may occur following an episode of salpingitis or pelvic surgery.

Sonographic features diagnostic for hydrosalpinx include a tubular or S-shaped cystic mass separate from the ovary, with:

  • “beads on a string” or “cogwheel” appearance (small round nodules less than 3 mm in size that represent endosalpingeal folds when viewed in cross section)
  • “waist sign” (indentations on opposite sides)
  • incomplete septations, which result from segments of distended tube folding over/adhering to other tubal segments

Levine and colleagues noted that 3-dimensional imaging may be helpful when the diagnosis is uncertain.1

When a mass is noted that has features classic for hydrosalpinx, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound 2010 Consensus Conference Statement recommends1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis
  • frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 1 through 6 below (slides of image collections), we present 5 cases, including one of a 45-year-old patient presenting with chronic pelvic pain who was found to have bilateral hydrosalginges and right-sided tubo-ovarian complex.

pelvic inclusion cysts

Pelvic/peritoneal inclusion cysts, or peritoneal pseudocysts, are typically associated with factors that increase the risk for pelvic adhesive disease (including endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, or prior pelvic surgery).

Classic sonographic features of pelvic inclusion cysts are:

  • cystic mass, usually with septations/loculations
  • the mass follows the contour of adjacent organs
  • ovary at edge of the mass or sometimes suspended within it
  • with or without flow in septation on color Doppler

When a mass is noted that has features classic for a peritoneal inclusion cyst, the US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound recommends that1:

  • no further imaging is necessary to establish the diagnosis (although further imaging may be needed if the diagnosis is uncertain)
  • the frequency of follow-up imaging should be based on the patient’s age and clinical symptoms

In FIGURES 7 through 22 below (slides of image collections), we present several cases that demonstrate pelvic inclusion cysts on imaging. One case involves a 25-year-old patient presenting for 2- and 3-dimensional pelvic imaging due to infertility. She had a history of laparoscopic left ovarian cystectomy, right paratubal cystectomy, and lysis of adhesions. She was found to have a pelvic inclusion cyst and an endometrioma in the left ovary.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

References

Reference

1. Levine D, Brown DL, Andreotti RF, et al. Management of asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Ultrasound Q. 2010;26(3):121−131.

References

Reference

1. Levine D, Brown DL, Andreotti RF, et al. Management of asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Ultrasound Q. 2010;26(3):121−131.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
“Cogwheel” and other signs of hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts
Display Headline
“Cogwheel” and other signs of hydrosalpinx and pelvic inclusion cysts
Legacy Keywords
Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan MD, Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, Images in GYN ultrasound, pelvic inclusion cysts, hydrosalpinx, US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound, pelvic pain, pelvic cysts
Legacy Keywords
Michelle Stalnaker Ozcan MD, Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, Images in GYN ultrasound, pelvic inclusion cysts, hydrosalpinx, US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound, pelvic pain, pelvic cysts
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: Current and emerging therapies

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: Current and emerging therapies

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is the new terminology to describe symptoms occurring secondary to vulvovaginal atrophy.1 The recent change in terminology originated with a consensus panel comprising the board of directors of the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health (ISSWSH) and the board of trustees of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS). At a terminology consensus conference in May 2013, these groups determined that the term GSM is medically more accurate and all encompassing than vulvovaginal atrophy. It is also more publicly acceptable.

The symptoms of GSM derive from the hypoestrogenic state most commonly associated with menopause and its effects on the genitourinary tract.2 Vaginal symptoms associated with GSM include vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, and dyspareunia.3 Histologically, a loss of superficial epithelial cells in the genitourinary tract leads to thinning of the tissue. There is then a loss of vaginal rugae and elasticity, leading to narrowing and shortening of the vagina.

In addition, the vaginal epithelium becomes much more fragile, which can lead to tears, bleeding, and fissures. There is also a loss of the subcutaneous fat of the labia majora, a change that can result in narrowing of the introitus, fusion of the labia majora, and shrinkage of the clitoral prepuce and urethra. The vaginal pH level becomes more alkaline, which may alter vaginal flora and increase the risk of urogenital infections—specifically, urinary tract infection (UTI). Vaginal secretions, largely transudate, from the vaginal vasculature also decrease over time. These changes lead to significant dyspareunia and impairment of sexual function.

In this article, we survey the therapies available for GSM, focusing first on proven treatments such as local estrogen administration and use of ospemifene (Osphena), and then describing an emerging treatment involving the use of fractional CO2 laser.

How prevalent is GSM?
Approximately half of all postmenopausal women in the United States report atrophy-related symptoms and a significant negative effect on quality of life.4–6 Few women with these symptoms seek medical attention.

The Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes (VIVA) survey found that 80% of women with genital atrophy considered its impact on their lives to be negative, 75% reported negative consequences in their sexual life, 68% reported that it made them feel less sexual, 33% reported negative effects on their marriage or relationship, and 26% reported a negative impact on their self-esteem.7

Another review of the impact of this condition by Nappi and Palacios estimated that, by the year 2025, there will be 1.1 billion women worldwide older than age 50 with specific needs related to GSM.8 Nappi and Palacios cite 4 recent surveys that suggest that health care providers need to be more proactive in helping patients disclose their symptoms. The same can be said of other symptoms of the urinary tract, such as urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence, as well as pelvic floor relaxation.

A recently published international survey on vaginal atrophy not only depicts the extremely high prevalence of the condition but also describes fairly significant differences in attitudes toward symptoms between countries in Europe and North America.9 Overall, 77% of respondents, who included more than 4,000 menopausal women, believed that women were uncomfortable discussing symptoms of vaginal atrophy.9

Pastore and colleagues, using data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), found the most prevalent urogenital symptoms to be vaginal dryness (27%), vaginal irritation or itching (18.6%), vaginal discharge (11.1%), and dysuria (5.2%).4 Unlike vasomotor symptoms of menopause, which tend to decrease over time, GSM does not spontaneously remit and commonly recurs when hormone therapy—the dominant treatment—is withdrawn.

What can we offer our patients?
Vaginal estrogen

The most common therapy used to manage GSM is estrogen. Most recommendations state that if the primary menopausal symptoms are related to vaginal atrophy, then local estrogen administration should be the primary mode of therapy. The Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group recently concluded that all commercially available vaginal estrogens effectively can relieve common vulvovaginal atrophy−related symptoms and have additional utility in women with urinary urgency, frequency, stress incontinence, urge incontinence, and recurrent UTIs.10 Although their meta-­analysis clearly demonstrated that estrogen therapy improves the symptoms of GSM, investigators acknowledged that a clearer understanding is needed of the exact risk to the endometrium with sustained use of vaginal estrogen, as well as a more precise assessment of changes in serum estradiol levels.10

A recent Cochrane review concluded that all forms of local estrogen appear to be equally effective for symptoms of vaginal atrophy.11 One trial cited in the review found significant adverse effects following administration of cream, compared with tablets, causing uterine bleeding, breast pain, and perineal pain.11

 

 

Another trial cited in the Cochrane review found significant endometrial overstimulation following use of cream, compared with the vaginal ring. As a treatment of choice, women appeared to favor the estradiol-releasing vaginal ring for ease of use, comfort of product, and overall satisfaction.11

After the release of the WHI data, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a “black box” warning on postmenopausal hormone use in women, which has significantly reduced the use of both local and systemic estrogen in eligible women. NAMS has recommended that the FDA revisit this warning, calling specifically for an independent commission to scrutinize every major WHI paper to determine whether the data justify the conclusions drawn.12

Most data back local estrogen as treatment for GSM
In 2013, the North American Menopause Society (NAMS) issued a position statement noting that the choice of therapy for genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) depends on the severity of symptoms, the efficacy and safety of therapy for the individual patient, and patient preference.1

To date, estrogen therapy is the most effective treatment for moderate to severe GSM, although a direct comparison of estrogen and ospemifene is lacking. Nonhormonal therapies available without a prescription provide sufficient relief for most women with mild symptoms. When low-dose estrogen is administered locally, a progestin is not indicated for women without a uterus—and generally is not indicated for women with an intact uterus. However, endometrial safety has not been studied in clinical trials beyond 1 year. Data are insufficient to confirm the safety of local estrogen in women with breast cancer.

Future research on the use of the fractional CO2 laser, which seems to be a promising emerging therapy, may provide clinicians with another option to treat the common and distressing problem of GSM.

Reference
1. Management of symptomatic vulvovaginal atrophy: 2013 position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2013;20(9):888–902.

Ospemifene
This estrogen agonist and antagonist selectively stimulates or inhibits estrogen receptors of different target tissues, making it a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM). In a study involving 826 postmenopausal women randomly allocated to 30 mg or 60 mg of ospemifene, the 60-mg dose proved to be more effective for improving vulvovaginal atrophy.13 Long-term safety studies revealed that ospemifene 60 mg given daily for 52 weeks was well tolerated and not associated with any endometrial- or breast-related safety issues.13,14 Common adverse effects of ospemifene reported during clinical trials included hot flashes, vaginal discharge, muscle spasms, general discharge, and excessive sweating.12

Vaginal lubricants and moisturizers
Nonestrogen water- or silicone-based vaginal lubricants and moisturizers may alleviate vaginal symptoms related to menopause. These products may be particularly helpful for women who do not wish to use hormone therapies.

Vaginal lubricants are intended to relieve friction and dyspareunia related to vaginal dryness during intercourse, with the ultimate goal of trapping moisture and providing long-term relief of vaginal dryness.

Although data are limited on the efficacy of these products, prospective studies have demonstrated that vaginal moisturizers improve vaginal dryness, pH balance, and elasticity and reduce vaginal itching, irritation, and dyspareunia.

Data are insufficient to support the use of herbal remedies or soy products for the treatment of vaginal symptoms.

An emerging therapy: fractional CO2 laser
In September 2014, the FDA cleared for use the SmartXide2 CO2 laser system (DEKA Medical) for “incision, excision, vaporization and coagulation of body soft tissues” in medical specialties that include gynecology and genitourinary surgery.15 The system, also marketed by Cynosure as the MonaLisa Touch treatment, was not approved specifically for treatment of GSM—and it is important to note that the path to device clearance by the FDA is much less cumbersome than the route to drug approval. As NAMS notes in an article about the fractional CO2 laser, “Device clearance does not require the large, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with established efficacy and safety endpoints required for the approval of new drugs.”16 Nevertheless, this laser system appears to be poised to become a new treatment for the symptoms of GSM. 

This laser supplies energy with a specific pulse to the vaginal wall to rapidly and superficially ablate the epithelial component of atrophic mucosa, which is characterized by low water content. Ablation is followed by tissue coagulation, stimulated by laser energy penetrating into deeper tissues, triggering the synthesis of new collagen and other components of the ground substance of the matrix.

The supraphysiologic level of heat generated by the CO2 laser induces a rapid and transient heat-shock response that temporarily alters cellular metabolism and activates a small family of proteins referred to as the “heat shock proteins” (HSPs). HSP 70, which is overexpressed following laser treatment, stimulates transforming growth­factor‑beta, triggering an inflammatory response that stimulates fibroblasts, which produce new collagen and extracellular matrix.

 

 

The laser has emissions characteristics aligned for the transfer of the energy load to the mucosa while avoiding excessive localized damage. This aspect of its design allows for restoration of the permeability of the connective tissue, enabling the physiologic transfer of various nutrients from capillaries to tissues. When there is a loss of estrogen, as during menopause, vaginal atrophy develops, with the epithelium deteriorating and thinning. The fractional CO2 laser therapy improves the state of the epithelium by restoring epithelial cell trophism.

The vaginal dryness that occurs with atrophy is due to poor blood flow, as well as reduced activity of the fibroblasts in the deeper tissue. The increased lubrication that occurs after treatment is usually a vaginal transudate from blood outflow through the capillaries that supply blood to the vaginal epithelium. The high presence of water molecules increases permeability, allowing easier transport of metabolites and nutrients from capillaries to tissue, as well as the drainage of waste products from tissues to blood and lymph vessels.

With atrophy, the glycogen in the epithelial cells decreases. Because lactobacilli need glycogen to thrive and are responsible for maintaining the acidity of the vagina, the pH level increases. With the restoration of trophism, glycogen levels increase, furthering colonization of vaginal lactobacilli as well as vaginal acidity, reducing the pH level. This effect also may protect against the development of recurrent UTIs.

A look at the data
To date, more than 2,000 women in Italy and more than 10,000 women worldwide with GSM have been treated with fractional CO2 laser therapy, and several peer-reviewed publications have documented its efficacy and safety.17–21

In published studies, however, the populations have been small and the investigations have been mostly short term  (12 weeks).17–21

A pilot study reported that a treatment cycle of 3 laser applications significantly improved the most bothersome symptoms of vulvovaginal atrophy and improved scores of vaginal health at 12 weeks’ follow-up in 50 women who had not responded to or were unsatisfied with local estrogen therapy.17 This investigation was followed by 2 additional studies involving another 92 women that specifically addressed the impact of fractional CO2 laser therapy on dyspareunia and female sexual function.19,20 Both studies showed statistically significant improvement in dyspareunia as well as Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores. All women in these studies were treated in an office setting with no pretreatment anesthesia. No adverse events were reported.

Recently published histology data highlight significant changes 1 month after fractional CO2 laser treatment that included a much thicker epithelium with wide columns of large epithelial cells rich in glycogen.21 Also noted was a significant reorganization of connective tissue, both in the lamina propria and the core of the papillae (FIGURES 1 and 2).

FIGURE 1: Early-stage vaginal atrophy
  
This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections reveals untreated early-stage vaginal atrophy (A), with thinning epithelium and the presence of papillae, and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy
FIGURE 2: Atrophic vaginitis
  

This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections shows untreated atrophic vaginitis (A) and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy.

Caveats
No International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 or 10 code has been assigned to the procedure to date, and the cost to the patient ranges from $600 to $1,000 per procedure.16

NAMS position. A review of the technology by NAMS noted the need for large, long-term, randomized, sham-controlled studies “to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of this procedure.”16

NAMS also notes that “lasers have become a very costly option for the treatment of symptomatic [GSM], without a single trial comparing active laser treatment to sham laser treatment and no information on long-term safety. In all published trials to date, only several hundred women have been studied and most studies are only 12 weeks in duration.”16

Not a new concept. The concept of treating skin with a microablative CO2 laser is not new. This laser has been safely used on the skin of the face, neck, and chest to produce new collagen and elastin fibers with remodeling of tissue.22,23

Preliminary data on the use of a fractionated CO2 microablative laser to treat symptoms associated with GSM suggest that the therapy is feasible, effective, and safe in the short term. If these findings are confirmed by larger, longer-term, well-controlled studies, this laser will be an additional safe and effective treatment for this very common and distressing disorder.

 

 

Fractional CO2 laser: A study in progress
Two authors (Mickey Karram, MD, and Eric Sokol, MD) are performing a study of the fractional CO2 laser for treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) in the United States. To date, 30 women with GSM have been treated with 3 cycles and followed for 3 months. Preliminary data show significant improvement in all symptoms, with all patients treated in an office setting with no pretreatment or posttreatment analgesia required.

FIGURE 3: Fractional CO2 laser treatmentThe probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm.

The laser settings for treatment included a power of 30 W, a dwell time of 1,000 µs, spacing between 2 adjacent treated spots of 1,000 µs, and a stack parameter for pulses from 1 to 3. 

Laser energy is delivered through a specially designed scanner and a vaginal probe. The probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm (FIGURE 3). The laser beam projects onto a 45° mirror placed at the tip of the probe, which reflects it at 90°, thereby ensuring that only the vaginal wall is treated, and not the uterine cervix.

A treatment cycle included 3 laser treatments at 6-week intervals. Each treatment lasted 3 to 5 minutes. Initial improvement was noted in most patients, including increased lubrication within 1 week after the first treatment, with further improvement after each session. To date, the positive results have persisted, and all women in the trial now have been followed for 3 months—all have noted improvement in symptoms. They will continue periodic assessment, with a final subjective and objective evaluation 1 year after their first treatment.

Bottom line
Although preliminary studies of the fractional CO2 laser as a treatment for GSM are promising, local estrogen is backed by a large body of reliable data. Ospemifene also has FDA approval for treatment of this disorder.

For women who cannot or will not use a hormone-based therapy, vaginal lubricants and moisturizer may offer at least some relief.

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References

  1. Portman DJ, Gass ML. Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: new terminology for vulvovaginal atrophy from the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health and the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2014;21(10):1–6.
  2. Calleja-Agius J, Brincat MP. Urogenital atrophy. Climacteric. 2009;12(4):279–285.
  3. Mehta A, Bachmann G. Vulvovaginal complaints. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2008;51(3):549–555.
  4. Pastore LM, Carter RA, Hulka BS, Wells E. Self-reported urogenital symptoms in postmenopausal women: Women’s Health Initiative. Maturitas. 2004;49(4):292–303.
  5. Santoro N, Komi J. Prevalence and impact of vaginal symptoms among postmenopausal women. J Sex Med. 2009;6(8):2133–2142.
  6. Kingsberg SA, Wysocki S, Magnus L, Krychman ML. Vulvar and vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: findings from the REVIVE (REal Women’s VIews of Treatment Options for Menopausal Vaginal ChangEs) survey. J Sex Med. 2013;10(7):1790–1799.
  7. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Vaginal Health Insights, Views and Attitudes (VIVA)—results from an international survey. Climacteric. 2012;15(1):36–44.
  8. Nappi RE, Palacios S. Impact of vulvovaginal atrophy on sexual health and quality of life at postmenopause. Climacteric. 2014;17(1):3–9.
  9. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Women’s voices in menopause: results from an international survey on vaginal atrophy. Maturitas. 2010;67(3):233–238.
  10. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.
  11. Suckling J, Lethaby A, Kennedy R. Local estrogen for vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;Oct 18(4):CD001500.
  12. Utian WH. A decade post WHI, menopausal hormone therapy comes full circle—need for independent commission. Climacteric 2012;15(4):320–325.
  13. Bachmann GA, Komi JO. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Ospemifene Study Group. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
  14. Wurz GT, Kao CT, Degregorio MW. Safety and efficacy of ospemifene for the treatment of dyspareunia associated with vulvar and vaginal atrophy due to menopause. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1939–1950.
  15. Letter to Paolo Peruzzi. US Food and Drug Administration; September 5, 2014. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf13/K133895.pdf. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  16. Krychman ML, Shifren JL, Liu JH, Kingsberg SL, Utian WH. The North American Menopause Society Menopause e-Consult: Laser Treatment Safe for Vulvovaginal Atrophy? The North American Menopause Society (NAMS). 2015;11(3). http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/846960. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  17. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Zerbinati N, et al. A 12-week treatment with fractional CO2 laser for vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. Climacteric. 2014;17(4):363–369.
  18. Salvatore S, Maggiore ULR, Origoni M, et al. Microablative fractional CO2 laser improves dyspareunia related to vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. J Endometriosis Pelvic Pain Disorders. 2014;6(3):121–162.
  19. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Parma M, et al. Sexual function after fractional microablative CO2 laser in women with vulvovaginal atrophy. Climacteric. 2015;18(2):219–225.
  20. Salvatore S, Maggiore LR, Athanasiou S, et al. Histological study on the effects of microablative fractional CO2 laser on atrophic vaginal tissue; an ex vivo study. Menopause. 2015;22(8):845–849.
  21. Zerbinati N, Serati M, Origoni M, et al. Microscopic and ultrastructural modifications of postmenopausal atrophic vaginal mucosa after fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment. Lasers Med Sci. 2015;30(1):429–436.
  22. Tierney EP, Hanke CW. Ablative fractionated CO2, laser resurfacing for the neck: prospective study and review of the literature. J Drugs Dermatol. 2009;8(8):723–731.
  23. Peterson JD, Goldman MP. Rejuvenation of the aging chest: a review and our experience. Dermatol Surg. 2011;37(5):555–571.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Mickey Karram, MD; Eric R. Sokol, MD; and Stefano Salvatore, MD

Dr. Karram is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Urology at the University of Cincinnati School of Medicine and Director of Urogynecology at the Christ Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Dr. Sokol is Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Urology at the Stanford University School of Medicine in Stanford, California.

Dr. Salvatore is Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Hospital, in Milan, Italy.

Dr. Karram reports being a speaker and consultant for Cynosure. Dr. Salvatore reports being a speaker and consultant for DEKA Medical. Dr. Sokol reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1–e6
Legacy Keywords
Mickey Karram MD, Eric R. Sokol MD, Stefano Salvatore MD,genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, menopause, vulvovaginal atrophy,International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health,ISSWSH,North American Menopause Society,NAMS, vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, dyspareunia, vaginal epithelium, urogenital infections, urinary tract infection, UTI, CO2 laser, local estrogen administration, Osphena, ospemifene, Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes survey, VIVA, Women's Health Initiative,WHI, vaginal estrogen, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, DEKA Medical, SmartXide COs laser system,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Mickey Karram, MD; Eric R. Sokol, MD; and Stefano Salvatore, MD

Dr. Karram is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Urology at the University of Cincinnati School of Medicine and Director of Urogynecology at the Christ Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Dr. Sokol is Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Urology at the Stanford University School of Medicine in Stanford, California.

Dr. Salvatore is Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Hospital, in Milan, Italy.

Dr. Karram reports being a speaker and consultant for Cynosure. Dr. Salvatore reports being a speaker and consultant for DEKA Medical. Dr. Sokol reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Mickey Karram, MD; Eric R. Sokol, MD; and Stefano Salvatore, MD

Dr. Karram is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Urology at the University of Cincinnati School of Medicine and Director of Urogynecology at the Christ Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Dr. Sokol is Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Urology at the Stanford University School of Medicine in Stanford, California.

Dr. Salvatore is Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Hospital, in Milan, Italy.

Dr. Karram reports being a speaker and consultant for Cynosure. Dr. Salvatore reports being a speaker and consultant for DEKA Medical. Dr. Sokol reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is the new terminology to describe symptoms occurring secondary to vulvovaginal atrophy.1 The recent change in terminology originated with a consensus panel comprising the board of directors of the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health (ISSWSH) and the board of trustees of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS). At a terminology consensus conference in May 2013, these groups determined that the term GSM is medically more accurate and all encompassing than vulvovaginal atrophy. It is also more publicly acceptable.

The symptoms of GSM derive from the hypoestrogenic state most commonly associated with menopause and its effects on the genitourinary tract.2 Vaginal symptoms associated with GSM include vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, and dyspareunia.3 Histologically, a loss of superficial epithelial cells in the genitourinary tract leads to thinning of the tissue. There is then a loss of vaginal rugae and elasticity, leading to narrowing and shortening of the vagina.

In addition, the vaginal epithelium becomes much more fragile, which can lead to tears, bleeding, and fissures. There is also a loss of the subcutaneous fat of the labia majora, a change that can result in narrowing of the introitus, fusion of the labia majora, and shrinkage of the clitoral prepuce and urethra. The vaginal pH level becomes more alkaline, which may alter vaginal flora and increase the risk of urogenital infections—specifically, urinary tract infection (UTI). Vaginal secretions, largely transudate, from the vaginal vasculature also decrease over time. These changes lead to significant dyspareunia and impairment of sexual function.

In this article, we survey the therapies available for GSM, focusing first on proven treatments such as local estrogen administration and use of ospemifene (Osphena), and then describing an emerging treatment involving the use of fractional CO2 laser.

How prevalent is GSM?
Approximately half of all postmenopausal women in the United States report atrophy-related symptoms and a significant negative effect on quality of life.4–6 Few women with these symptoms seek medical attention.

The Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes (VIVA) survey found that 80% of women with genital atrophy considered its impact on their lives to be negative, 75% reported negative consequences in their sexual life, 68% reported that it made them feel less sexual, 33% reported negative effects on their marriage or relationship, and 26% reported a negative impact on their self-esteem.7

Another review of the impact of this condition by Nappi and Palacios estimated that, by the year 2025, there will be 1.1 billion women worldwide older than age 50 with specific needs related to GSM.8 Nappi and Palacios cite 4 recent surveys that suggest that health care providers need to be more proactive in helping patients disclose their symptoms. The same can be said of other symptoms of the urinary tract, such as urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence, as well as pelvic floor relaxation.

A recently published international survey on vaginal atrophy not only depicts the extremely high prevalence of the condition but also describes fairly significant differences in attitudes toward symptoms between countries in Europe and North America.9 Overall, 77% of respondents, who included more than 4,000 menopausal women, believed that women were uncomfortable discussing symptoms of vaginal atrophy.9

Pastore and colleagues, using data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), found the most prevalent urogenital symptoms to be vaginal dryness (27%), vaginal irritation or itching (18.6%), vaginal discharge (11.1%), and dysuria (5.2%).4 Unlike vasomotor symptoms of menopause, which tend to decrease over time, GSM does not spontaneously remit and commonly recurs when hormone therapy—the dominant treatment—is withdrawn.

What can we offer our patients?
Vaginal estrogen

The most common therapy used to manage GSM is estrogen. Most recommendations state that if the primary menopausal symptoms are related to vaginal atrophy, then local estrogen administration should be the primary mode of therapy. The Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group recently concluded that all commercially available vaginal estrogens effectively can relieve common vulvovaginal atrophy−related symptoms and have additional utility in women with urinary urgency, frequency, stress incontinence, urge incontinence, and recurrent UTIs.10 Although their meta-­analysis clearly demonstrated that estrogen therapy improves the symptoms of GSM, investigators acknowledged that a clearer understanding is needed of the exact risk to the endometrium with sustained use of vaginal estrogen, as well as a more precise assessment of changes in serum estradiol levels.10

A recent Cochrane review concluded that all forms of local estrogen appear to be equally effective for symptoms of vaginal atrophy.11 One trial cited in the review found significant adverse effects following administration of cream, compared with tablets, causing uterine bleeding, breast pain, and perineal pain.11

 

 

Another trial cited in the Cochrane review found significant endometrial overstimulation following use of cream, compared with the vaginal ring. As a treatment of choice, women appeared to favor the estradiol-releasing vaginal ring for ease of use, comfort of product, and overall satisfaction.11

After the release of the WHI data, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a “black box” warning on postmenopausal hormone use in women, which has significantly reduced the use of both local and systemic estrogen in eligible women. NAMS has recommended that the FDA revisit this warning, calling specifically for an independent commission to scrutinize every major WHI paper to determine whether the data justify the conclusions drawn.12

Most data back local estrogen as treatment for GSM
In 2013, the North American Menopause Society (NAMS) issued a position statement noting that the choice of therapy for genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) depends on the severity of symptoms, the efficacy and safety of therapy for the individual patient, and patient preference.1

To date, estrogen therapy is the most effective treatment for moderate to severe GSM, although a direct comparison of estrogen and ospemifene is lacking. Nonhormonal therapies available without a prescription provide sufficient relief for most women with mild symptoms. When low-dose estrogen is administered locally, a progestin is not indicated for women without a uterus—and generally is not indicated for women with an intact uterus. However, endometrial safety has not been studied in clinical trials beyond 1 year. Data are insufficient to confirm the safety of local estrogen in women with breast cancer.

Future research on the use of the fractional CO2 laser, which seems to be a promising emerging therapy, may provide clinicians with another option to treat the common and distressing problem of GSM.

Reference
1. Management of symptomatic vulvovaginal atrophy: 2013 position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2013;20(9):888–902.

Ospemifene
This estrogen agonist and antagonist selectively stimulates or inhibits estrogen receptors of different target tissues, making it a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM). In a study involving 826 postmenopausal women randomly allocated to 30 mg or 60 mg of ospemifene, the 60-mg dose proved to be more effective for improving vulvovaginal atrophy.13 Long-term safety studies revealed that ospemifene 60 mg given daily for 52 weeks was well tolerated and not associated with any endometrial- or breast-related safety issues.13,14 Common adverse effects of ospemifene reported during clinical trials included hot flashes, vaginal discharge, muscle spasms, general discharge, and excessive sweating.12

Vaginal lubricants and moisturizers
Nonestrogen water- or silicone-based vaginal lubricants and moisturizers may alleviate vaginal symptoms related to menopause. These products may be particularly helpful for women who do not wish to use hormone therapies.

Vaginal lubricants are intended to relieve friction and dyspareunia related to vaginal dryness during intercourse, with the ultimate goal of trapping moisture and providing long-term relief of vaginal dryness.

Although data are limited on the efficacy of these products, prospective studies have demonstrated that vaginal moisturizers improve vaginal dryness, pH balance, and elasticity and reduce vaginal itching, irritation, and dyspareunia.

Data are insufficient to support the use of herbal remedies or soy products for the treatment of vaginal symptoms.

An emerging therapy: fractional CO2 laser
In September 2014, the FDA cleared for use the SmartXide2 CO2 laser system (DEKA Medical) for “incision, excision, vaporization and coagulation of body soft tissues” in medical specialties that include gynecology and genitourinary surgery.15 The system, also marketed by Cynosure as the MonaLisa Touch treatment, was not approved specifically for treatment of GSM—and it is important to note that the path to device clearance by the FDA is much less cumbersome than the route to drug approval. As NAMS notes in an article about the fractional CO2 laser, “Device clearance does not require the large, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with established efficacy and safety endpoints required for the approval of new drugs.”16 Nevertheless, this laser system appears to be poised to become a new treatment for the symptoms of GSM. 

This laser supplies energy with a specific pulse to the vaginal wall to rapidly and superficially ablate the epithelial component of atrophic mucosa, which is characterized by low water content. Ablation is followed by tissue coagulation, stimulated by laser energy penetrating into deeper tissues, triggering the synthesis of new collagen and other components of the ground substance of the matrix.

The supraphysiologic level of heat generated by the CO2 laser induces a rapid and transient heat-shock response that temporarily alters cellular metabolism and activates a small family of proteins referred to as the “heat shock proteins” (HSPs). HSP 70, which is overexpressed following laser treatment, stimulates transforming growth­factor‑beta, triggering an inflammatory response that stimulates fibroblasts, which produce new collagen and extracellular matrix.

 

 

The laser has emissions characteristics aligned for the transfer of the energy load to the mucosa while avoiding excessive localized damage. This aspect of its design allows for restoration of the permeability of the connective tissue, enabling the physiologic transfer of various nutrients from capillaries to tissues. When there is a loss of estrogen, as during menopause, vaginal atrophy develops, with the epithelium deteriorating and thinning. The fractional CO2 laser therapy improves the state of the epithelium by restoring epithelial cell trophism.

The vaginal dryness that occurs with atrophy is due to poor blood flow, as well as reduced activity of the fibroblasts in the deeper tissue. The increased lubrication that occurs after treatment is usually a vaginal transudate from blood outflow through the capillaries that supply blood to the vaginal epithelium. The high presence of water molecules increases permeability, allowing easier transport of metabolites and nutrients from capillaries to tissue, as well as the drainage of waste products from tissues to blood and lymph vessels.

With atrophy, the glycogen in the epithelial cells decreases. Because lactobacilli need glycogen to thrive and are responsible for maintaining the acidity of the vagina, the pH level increases. With the restoration of trophism, glycogen levels increase, furthering colonization of vaginal lactobacilli as well as vaginal acidity, reducing the pH level. This effect also may protect against the development of recurrent UTIs.

A look at the data
To date, more than 2,000 women in Italy and more than 10,000 women worldwide with GSM have been treated with fractional CO2 laser therapy, and several peer-reviewed publications have documented its efficacy and safety.17–21

In published studies, however, the populations have been small and the investigations have been mostly short term  (12 weeks).17–21

A pilot study reported that a treatment cycle of 3 laser applications significantly improved the most bothersome symptoms of vulvovaginal atrophy and improved scores of vaginal health at 12 weeks’ follow-up in 50 women who had not responded to or were unsatisfied with local estrogen therapy.17 This investigation was followed by 2 additional studies involving another 92 women that specifically addressed the impact of fractional CO2 laser therapy on dyspareunia and female sexual function.19,20 Both studies showed statistically significant improvement in dyspareunia as well as Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores. All women in these studies were treated in an office setting with no pretreatment anesthesia. No adverse events were reported.

Recently published histology data highlight significant changes 1 month after fractional CO2 laser treatment that included a much thicker epithelium with wide columns of large epithelial cells rich in glycogen.21 Also noted was a significant reorganization of connective tissue, both in the lamina propria and the core of the papillae (FIGURES 1 and 2).

FIGURE 1: Early-stage vaginal atrophy
  
This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections reveals untreated early-stage vaginal atrophy (A), with thinning epithelium and the presence of papillae, and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy
FIGURE 2: Atrophic vaginitis
  

This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections shows untreated atrophic vaginitis (A) and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy.

Caveats
No International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 or 10 code has been assigned to the procedure to date, and the cost to the patient ranges from $600 to $1,000 per procedure.16

NAMS position. A review of the technology by NAMS noted the need for large, long-term, randomized, sham-controlled studies “to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of this procedure.”16

NAMS also notes that “lasers have become a very costly option for the treatment of symptomatic [GSM], without a single trial comparing active laser treatment to sham laser treatment and no information on long-term safety. In all published trials to date, only several hundred women have been studied and most studies are only 12 weeks in duration.”16

Not a new concept. The concept of treating skin with a microablative CO2 laser is not new. This laser has been safely used on the skin of the face, neck, and chest to produce new collagen and elastin fibers with remodeling of tissue.22,23

Preliminary data on the use of a fractionated CO2 microablative laser to treat symptoms associated with GSM suggest that the therapy is feasible, effective, and safe in the short term. If these findings are confirmed by larger, longer-term, well-controlled studies, this laser will be an additional safe and effective treatment for this very common and distressing disorder.

 

 

Fractional CO2 laser: A study in progress
Two authors (Mickey Karram, MD, and Eric Sokol, MD) are performing a study of the fractional CO2 laser for treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) in the United States. To date, 30 women with GSM have been treated with 3 cycles and followed for 3 months. Preliminary data show significant improvement in all symptoms, with all patients treated in an office setting with no pretreatment or posttreatment analgesia required.

FIGURE 3: Fractional CO2 laser treatmentThe probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm.

The laser settings for treatment included a power of 30 W, a dwell time of 1,000 µs, spacing between 2 adjacent treated spots of 1,000 µs, and a stack parameter for pulses from 1 to 3. 

Laser energy is delivered through a specially designed scanner and a vaginal probe. The probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm (FIGURE 3). The laser beam projects onto a 45° mirror placed at the tip of the probe, which reflects it at 90°, thereby ensuring that only the vaginal wall is treated, and not the uterine cervix.

A treatment cycle included 3 laser treatments at 6-week intervals. Each treatment lasted 3 to 5 minutes. Initial improvement was noted in most patients, including increased lubrication within 1 week after the first treatment, with further improvement after each session. To date, the positive results have persisted, and all women in the trial now have been followed for 3 months—all have noted improvement in symptoms. They will continue periodic assessment, with a final subjective and objective evaluation 1 year after their first treatment.

Bottom line
Although preliminary studies of the fractional CO2 laser as a treatment for GSM are promising, local estrogen is backed by a large body of reliable data. Ospemifene also has FDA approval for treatment of this disorder.

For women who cannot or will not use a hormone-based therapy, vaginal lubricants and moisturizer may offer at least some relief.

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is the new terminology to describe symptoms occurring secondary to vulvovaginal atrophy.1 The recent change in terminology originated with a consensus panel comprising the board of directors of the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health (ISSWSH) and the board of trustees of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS). At a terminology consensus conference in May 2013, these groups determined that the term GSM is medically more accurate and all encompassing than vulvovaginal atrophy. It is also more publicly acceptable.

The symptoms of GSM derive from the hypoestrogenic state most commonly associated with menopause and its effects on the genitourinary tract.2 Vaginal symptoms associated with GSM include vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, and dyspareunia.3 Histologically, a loss of superficial epithelial cells in the genitourinary tract leads to thinning of the tissue. There is then a loss of vaginal rugae and elasticity, leading to narrowing and shortening of the vagina.

In addition, the vaginal epithelium becomes much more fragile, which can lead to tears, bleeding, and fissures. There is also a loss of the subcutaneous fat of the labia majora, a change that can result in narrowing of the introitus, fusion of the labia majora, and shrinkage of the clitoral prepuce and urethra. The vaginal pH level becomes more alkaline, which may alter vaginal flora and increase the risk of urogenital infections—specifically, urinary tract infection (UTI). Vaginal secretions, largely transudate, from the vaginal vasculature also decrease over time. These changes lead to significant dyspareunia and impairment of sexual function.

In this article, we survey the therapies available for GSM, focusing first on proven treatments such as local estrogen administration and use of ospemifene (Osphena), and then describing an emerging treatment involving the use of fractional CO2 laser.

How prevalent is GSM?
Approximately half of all postmenopausal women in the United States report atrophy-related symptoms and a significant negative effect on quality of life.4–6 Few women with these symptoms seek medical attention.

The Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes (VIVA) survey found that 80% of women with genital atrophy considered its impact on their lives to be negative, 75% reported negative consequences in their sexual life, 68% reported that it made them feel less sexual, 33% reported negative effects on their marriage or relationship, and 26% reported a negative impact on their self-esteem.7

Another review of the impact of this condition by Nappi and Palacios estimated that, by the year 2025, there will be 1.1 billion women worldwide older than age 50 with specific needs related to GSM.8 Nappi and Palacios cite 4 recent surveys that suggest that health care providers need to be more proactive in helping patients disclose their symptoms. The same can be said of other symptoms of the urinary tract, such as urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence, as well as pelvic floor relaxation.

A recently published international survey on vaginal atrophy not only depicts the extremely high prevalence of the condition but also describes fairly significant differences in attitudes toward symptoms between countries in Europe and North America.9 Overall, 77% of respondents, who included more than 4,000 menopausal women, believed that women were uncomfortable discussing symptoms of vaginal atrophy.9

Pastore and colleagues, using data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), found the most prevalent urogenital symptoms to be vaginal dryness (27%), vaginal irritation or itching (18.6%), vaginal discharge (11.1%), and dysuria (5.2%).4 Unlike vasomotor symptoms of menopause, which tend to decrease over time, GSM does not spontaneously remit and commonly recurs when hormone therapy—the dominant treatment—is withdrawn.

What can we offer our patients?
Vaginal estrogen

The most common therapy used to manage GSM is estrogen. Most recommendations state that if the primary menopausal symptoms are related to vaginal atrophy, then local estrogen administration should be the primary mode of therapy. The Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group recently concluded that all commercially available vaginal estrogens effectively can relieve common vulvovaginal atrophy−related symptoms and have additional utility in women with urinary urgency, frequency, stress incontinence, urge incontinence, and recurrent UTIs.10 Although their meta-­analysis clearly demonstrated that estrogen therapy improves the symptoms of GSM, investigators acknowledged that a clearer understanding is needed of the exact risk to the endometrium with sustained use of vaginal estrogen, as well as a more precise assessment of changes in serum estradiol levels.10

A recent Cochrane review concluded that all forms of local estrogen appear to be equally effective for symptoms of vaginal atrophy.11 One trial cited in the review found significant adverse effects following administration of cream, compared with tablets, causing uterine bleeding, breast pain, and perineal pain.11

 

 

Another trial cited in the Cochrane review found significant endometrial overstimulation following use of cream, compared with the vaginal ring. As a treatment of choice, women appeared to favor the estradiol-releasing vaginal ring for ease of use, comfort of product, and overall satisfaction.11

After the release of the WHI data, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a “black box” warning on postmenopausal hormone use in women, which has significantly reduced the use of both local and systemic estrogen in eligible women. NAMS has recommended that the FDA revisit this warning, calling specifically for an independent commission to scrutinize every major WHI paper to determine whether the data justify the conclusions drawn.12

Most data back local estrogen as treatment for GSM
In 2013, the North American Menopause Society (NAMS) issued a position statement noting that the choice of therapy for genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) depends on the severity of symptoms, the efficacy and safety of therapy for the individual patient, and patient preference.1

To date, estrogen therapy is the most effective treatment for moderate to severe GSM, although a direct comparison of estrogen and ospemifene is lacking. Nonhormonal therapies available without a prescription provide sufficient relief for most women with mild symptoms. When low-dose estrogen is administered locally, a progestin is not indicated for women without a uterus—and generally is not indicated for women with an intact uterus. However, endometrial safety has not been studied in clinical trials beyond 1 year. Data are insufficient to confirm the safety of local estrogen in women with breast cancer.

Future research on the use of the fractional CO2 laser, which seems to be a promising emerging therapy, may provide clinicians with another option to treat the common and distressing problem of GSM.

Reference
1. Management of symptomatic vulvovaginal atrophy: 2013 position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2013;20(9):888–902.

Ospemifene
This estrogen agonist and antagonist selectively stimulates or inhibits estrogen receptors of different target tissues, making it a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM). In a study involving 826 postmenopausal women randomly allocated to 30 mg or 60 mg of ospemifene, the 60-mg dose proved to be more effective for improving vulvovaginal atrophy.13 Long-term safety studies revealed that ospemifene 60 mg given daily for 52 weeks was well tolerated and not associated with any endometrial- or breast-related safety issues.13,14 Common adverse effects of ospemifene reported during clinical trials included hot flashes, vaginal discharge, muscle spasms, general discharge, and excessive sweating.12

Vaginal lubricants and moisturizers
Nonestrogen water- or silicone-based vaginal lubricants and moisturizers may alleviate vaginal symptoms related to menopause. These products may be particularly helpful for women who do not wish to use hormone therapies.

Vaginal lubricants are intended to relieve friction and dyspareunia related to vaginal dryness during intercourse, with the ultimate goal of trapping moisture and providing long-term relief of vaginal dryness.

Although data are limited on the efficacy of these products, prospective studies have demonstrated that vaginal moisturizers improve vaginal dryness, pH balance, and elasticity and reduce vaginal itching, irritation, and dyspareunia.

Data are insufficient to support the use of herbal remedies or soy products for the treatment of vaginal symptoms.

An emerging therapy: fractional CO2 laser
In September 2014, the FDA cleared for use the SmartXide2 CO2 laser system (DEKA Medical) for “incision, excision, vaporization and coagulation of body soft tissues” in medical specialties that include gynecology and genitourinary surgery.15 The system, also marketed by Cynosure as the MonaLisa Touch treatment, was not approved specifically for treatment of GSM—and it is important to note that the path to device clearance by the FDA is much less cumbersome than the route to drug approval. As NAMS notes in an article about the fractional CO2 laser, “Device clearance does not require the large, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with established efficacy and safety endpoints required for the approval of new drugs.”16 Nevertheless, this laser system appears to be poised to become a new treatment for the symptoms of GSM. 

This laser supplies energy with a specific pulse to the vaginal wall to rapidly and superficially ablate the epithelial component of atrophic mucosa, which is characterized by low water content. Ablation is followed by tissue coagulation, stimulated by laser energy penetrating into deeper tissues, triggering the synthesis of new collagen and other components of the ground substance of the matrix.

The supraphysiologic level of heat generated by the CO2 laser induces a rapid and transient heat-shock response that temporarily alters cellular metabolism and activates a small family of proteins referred to as the “heat shock proteins” (HSPs). HSP 70, which is overexpressed following laser treatment, stimulates transforming growth­factor‑beta, triggering an inflammatory response that stimulates fibroblasts, which produce new collagen and extracellular matrix.

 

 

The laser has emissions characteristics aligned for the transfer of the energy load to the mucosa while avoiding excessive localized damage. This aspect of its design allows for restoration of the permeability of the connective tissue, enabling the physiologic transfer of various nutrients from capillaries to tissues. When there is a loss of estrogen, as during menopause, vaginal atrophy develops, with the epithelium deteriorating and thinning. The fractional CO2 laser therapy improves the state of the epithelium by restoring epithelial cell trophism.

The vaginal dryness that occurs with atrophy is due to poor blood flow, as well as reduced activity of the fibroblasts in the deeper tissue. The increased lubrication that occurs after treatment is usually a vaginal transudate from blood outflow through the capillaries that supply blood to the vaginal epithelium. The high presence of water molecules increases permeability, allowing easier transport of metabolites and nutrients from capillaries to tissue, as well as the drainage of waste products from tissues to blood and lymph vessels.

With atrophy, the glycogen in the epithelial cells decreases. Because lactobacilli need glycogen to thrive and are responsible for maintaining the acidity of the vagina, the pH level increases. With the restoration of trophism, glycogen levels increase, furthering colonization of vaginal lactobacilli as well as vaginal acidity, reducing the pH level. This effect also may protect against the development of recurrent UTIs.

A look at the data
To date, more than 2,000 women in Italy and more than 10,000 women worldwide with GSM have been treated with fractional CO2 laser therapy, and several peer-reviewed publications have documented its efficacy and safety.17–21

In published studies, however, the populations have been small and the investigations have been mostly short term  (12 weeks).17–21

A pilot study reported that a treatment cycle of 3 laser applications significantly improved the most bothersome symptoms of vulvovaginal atrophy and improved scores of vaginal health at 12 weeks’ follow-up in 50 women who had not responded to or were unsatisfied with local estrogen therapy.17 This investigation was followed by 2 additional studies involving another 92 women that specifically addressed the impact of fractional CO2 laser therapy on dyspareunia and female sexual function.19,20 Both studies showed statistically significant improvement in dyspareunia as well as Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores. All women in these studies were treated in an office setting with no pretreatment anesthesia. No adverse events were reported.

Recently published histology data highlight significant changes 1 month after fractional CO2 laser treatment that included a much thicker epithelium with wide columns of large epithelial cells rich in glycogen.21 Also noted was a significant reorganization of connective tissue, both in the lamina propria and the core of the papillae (FIGURES 1 and 2).

FIGURE 1: Early-stage vaginal atrophy
  
This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections reveals untreated early-stage vaginal atrophy (A), with thinning epithelium and the presence of papillae, and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy
FIGURE 2: Atrophic vaginitis
  

This histologic preparation of vaginal mucosa sections shows untreated atrophic vaginitis (A) and the same mucosa 1 month after treatment with fractional CO2 laser therapy (B). Reprinted with permission from DEKA M.E.L.A. Srl (Calenzano, Italy) and Professor A. Calligaro, University of Pavia, Italy.

Caveats
No International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 or 10 code has been assigned to the procedure to date, and the cost to the patient ranges from $600 to $1,000 per procedure.16

NAMS position. A review of the technology by NAMS noted the need for large, long-term, randomized, sham-controlled studies “to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of this procedure.”16

NAMS also notes that “lasers have become a very costly option for the treatment of symptomatic [GSM], without a single trial comparing active laser treatment to sham laser treatment and no information on long-term safety. In all published trials to date, only several hundred women have been studied and most studies are only 12 weeks in duration.”16

Not a new concept. The concept of treating skin with a microablative CO2 laser is not new. This laser has been safely used on the skin of the face, neck, and chest to produce new collagen and elastin fibers with remodeling of tissue.22,23

Preliminary data on the use of a fractionated CO2 microablative laser to treat symptoms associated with GSM suggest that the therapy is feasible, effective, and safe in the short term. If these findings are confirmed by larger, longer-term, well-controlled studies, this laser will be an additional safe and effective treatment for this very common and distressing disorder.

 

 

Fractional CO2 laser: A study in progress
Two authors (Mickey Karram, MD, and Eric Sokol, MD) are performing a study of the fractional CO2 laser for treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) in the United States. To date, 30 women with GSM have been treated with 3 cycles and followed for 3 months. Preliminary data show significant improvement in all symptoms, with all patients treated in an office setting with no pretreatment or posttreatment analgesia required.

FIGURE 3: Fractional CO2 laser treatmentThe probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm.

The laser settings for treatment included a power of 30 W, a dwell time of 1,000 µs, spacing between 2 adjacent treated spots of 1,000 µs, and a stack parameter for pulses from 1 to 3. 

Laser energy is delivered through a specially designed scanner and a vaginal probe. The probe is slowly inserted to the top of the vaginal canal and then gradually withdrawn, treating the vaginal epithelium at increments of almost 1 cm (FIGURE 3). The laser beam projects onto a 45° mirror placed at the tip of the probe, which reflects it at 90°, thereby ensuring that only the vaginal wall is treated, and not the uterine cervix.

A treatment cycle included 3 laser treatments at 6-week intervals. Each treatment lasted 3 to 5 minutes. Initial improvement was noted in most patients, including increased lubrication within 1 week after the first treatment, with further improvement after each session. To date, the positive results have persisted, and all women in the trial now have been followed for 3 months—all have noted improvement in symptoms. They will continue periodic assessment, with a final subjective and objective evaluation 1 year after their first treatment.

Bottom line
Although preliminary studies of the fractional CO2 laser as a treatment for GSM are promising, local estrogen is backed by a large body of reliable data. Ospemifene also has FDA approval for treatment of this disorder.

For women who cannot or will not use a hormone-based therapy, vaginal lubricants and moisturizer may offer at least some relief.

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References

  1. Portman DJ, Gass ML. Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: new terminology for vulvovaginal atrophy from the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health and the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2014;21(10):1–6.
  2. Calleja-Agius J, Brincat MP. Urogenital atrophy. Climacteric. 2009;12(4):279–285.
  3. Mehta A, Bachmann G. Vulvovaginal complaints. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2008;51(3):549–555.
  4. Pastore LM, Carter RA, Hulka BS, Wells E. Self-reported urogenital symptoms in postmenopausal women: Women’s Health Initiative. Maturitas. 2004;49(4):292–303.
  5. Santoro N, Komi J. Prevalence and impact of vaginal symptoms among postmenopausal women. J Sex Med. 2009;6(8):2133–2142.
  6. Kingsberg SA, Wysocki S, Magnus L, Krychman ML. Vulvar and vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: findings from the REVIVE (REal Women’s VIews of Treatment Options for Menopausal Vaginal ChangEs) survey. J Sex Med. 2013;10(7):1790–1799.
  7. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Vaginal Health Insights, Views and Attitudes (VIVA)—results from an international survey. Climacteric. 2012;15(1):36–44.
  8. Nappi RE, Palacios S. Impact of vulvovaginal atrophy on sexual health and quality of life at postmenopause. Climacteric. 2014;17(1):3–9.
  9. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Women’s voices in menopause: results from an international survey on vaginal atrophy. Maturitas. 2010;67(3):233–238.
  10. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.
  11. Suckling J, Lethaby A, Kennedy R. Local estrogen for vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;Oct 18(4):CD001500.
  12. Utian WH. A decade post WHI, menopausal hormone therapy comes full circle—need for independent commission. Climacteric 2012;15(4):320–325.
  13. Bachmann GA, Komi JO. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Ospemifene Study Group. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
  14. Wurz GT, Kao CT, Degregorio MW. Safety and efficacy of ospemifene for the treatment of dyspareunia associated with vulvar and vaginal atrophy due to menopause. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1939–1950.
  15. Letter to Paolo Peruzzi. US Food and Drug Administration; September 5, 2014. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf13/K133895.pdf. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  16. Krychman ML, Shifren JL, Liu JH, Kingsberg SL, Utian WH. The North American Menopause Society Menopause e-Consult: Laser Treatment Safe for Vulvovaginal Atrophy? The North American Menopause Society (NAMS). 2015;11(3). http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/846960. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  17. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Zerbinati N, et al. A 12-week treatment with fractional CO2 laser for vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. Climacteric. 2014;17(4):363–369.
  18. Salvatore S, Maggiore ULR, Origoni M, et al. Microablative fractional CO2 laser improves dyspareunia related to vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. J Endometriosis Pelvic Pain Disorders. 2014;6(3):121–162.
  19. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Parma M, et al. Sexual function after fractional microablative CO2 laser in women with vulvovaginal atrophy. Climacteric. 2015;18(2):219–225.
  20. Salvatore S, Maggiore LR, Athanasiou S, et al. Histological study on the effects of microablative fractional CO2 laser on atrophic vaginal tissue; an ex vivo study. Menopause. 2015;22(8):845–849.
  21. Zerbinati N, Serati M, Origoni M, et al. Microscopic and ultrastructural modifications of postmenopausal atrophic vaginal mucosa after fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment. Lasers Med Sci. 2015;30(1):429–436.
  22. Tierney EP, Hanke CW. Ablative fractionated CO2, laser resurfacing for the neck: prospective study and review of the literature. J Drugs Dermatol. 2009;8(8):723–731.
  23. Peterson JD, Goldman MP. Rejuvenation of the aging chest: a review and our experience. Dermatol Surg. 2011;37(5):555–571.
References

  1. Portman DJ, Gass ML. Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: new terminology for vulvovaginal atrophy from the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health and the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2014;21(10):1–6.
  2. Calleja-Agius J, Brincat MP. Urogenital atrophy. Climacteric. 2009;12(4):279–285.
  3. Mehta A, Bachmann G. Vulvovaginal complaints. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2008;51(3):549–555.
  4. Pastore LM, Carter RA, Hulka BS, Wells E. Self-reported urogenital symptoms in postmenopausal women: Women’s Health Initiative. Maturitas. 2004;49(4):292–303.
  5. Santoro N, Komi J. Prevalence and impact of vaginal symptoms among postmenopausal women. J Sex Med. 2009;6(8):2133–2142.
  6. Kingsberg SA, Wysocki S, Magnus L, Krychman ML. Vulvar and vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: findings from the REVIVE (REal Women’s VIews of Treatment Options for Menopausal Vaginal ChangEs) survey. J Sex Med. 2013;10(7):1790–1799.
  7. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Vaginal Health Insights, Views and Attitudes (VIVA)—results from an international survey. Climacteric. 2012;15(1):36–44.
  8. Nappi RE, Palacios S. Impact of vulvovaginal atrophy on sexual health and quality of life at postmenopause. Climacteric. 2014;17(1):3–9.
  9. Nappi RE, Kokot-Kierepa M. Women’s voices in menopause: results from an international survey on vaginal atrophy. Maturitas. 2010;67(3):233–238.
  10. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.
  11. Suckling J, Lethaby A, Kennedy R. Local estrogen for vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;Oct 18(4):CD001500.
  12. Utian WH. A decade post WHI, menopausal hormone therapy comes full circle—need for independent commission. Climacteric 2012;15(4):320–325.
  13. Bachmann GA, Komi JO. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Ospemifene Study Group. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
  14. Wurz GT, Kao CT, Degregorio MW. Safety and efficacy of ospemifene for the treatment of dyspareunia associated with vulvar and vaginal atrophy due to menopause. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1939–1950.
  15. Letter to Paolo Peruzzi. US Food and Drug Administration; September 5, 2014. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf13/K133895.pdf. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  16. Krychman ML, Shifren JL, Liu JH, Kingsberg SL, Utian WH. The North American Menopause Society Menopause e-Consult: Laser Treatment Safe for Vulvovaginal Atrophy? The North American Menopause Society (NAMS). 2015;11(3). http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/846960. Accessed July 8, 2015.
  17. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Zerbinati N, et al. A 12-week treatment with fractional CO2 laser for vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. Climacteric. 2014;17(4):363–369.
  18. Salvatore S, Maggiore ULR, Origoni M, et al. Microablative fractional CO2 laser improves dyspareunia related to vulvovaginal atrophy: a pilot study. J Endometriosis Pelvic Pain Disorders. 2014;6(3):121–162.
  19. Salvatore S, Nappi RE, Parma M, et al. Sexual function after fractional microablative CO2 laser in women with vulvovaginal atrophy. Climacteric. 2015;18(2):219–225.
  20. Salvatore S, Maggiore LR, Athanasiou S, et al. Histological study on the effects of microablative fractional CO2 laser on atrophic vaginal tissue; an ex vivo study. Menopause. 2015;22(8):845–849.
  21. Zerbinati N, Serati M, Origoni M, et al. Microscopic and ultrastructural modifications of postmenopausal atrophic vaginal mucosa after fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment. Lasers Med Sci. 2015;30(1):429–436.
  22. Tierney EP, Hanke CW. Ablative fractionated CO2, laser resurfacing for the neck: prospective study and review of the literature. J Drugs Dermatol. 2009;8(8):723–731.
  23. Peterson JD, Goldman MP. Rejuvenation of the aging chest: a review and our experience. Dermatol Surg. 2011;37(5):555–571.
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
e1–e6
Page Number
e1–e6
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: Current and emerging therapies
Display Headline
Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: Current and emerging therapies
Legacy Keywords
Mickey Karram MD, Eric R. Sokol MD, Stefano Salvatore MD,genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, menopause, vulvovaginal atrophy,International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health,ISSWSH,North American Menopause Society,NAMS, vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, dyspareunia, vaginal epithelium, urogenital infections, urinary tract infection, UTI, CO2 laser, local estrogen administration, Osphena, ospemifene, Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes survey, VIVA, Women's Health Initiative,WHI, vaginal estrogen, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, DEKA Medical, SmartXide COs laser system,
Legacy Keywords
Mickey Karram MD, Eric R. Sokol MD, Stefano Salvatore MD,genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, menopause, vulvovaginal atrophy,International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health,ISSWSH,North American Menopause Society,NAMS, vaginal or vulvar dryness, discharge, itching, dyspareunia, vaginal epithelium, urogenital infections, urinary tract infection, UTI, CO2 laser, local estrogen administration, Osphena, ospemifene, Vaginal Health: Insights, Views, and Attitudes survey, VIVA, Women's Health Initiative,WHI, vaginal estrogen, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, DEKA Medical, SmartXide COs laser system,
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

   In this article

  • What can we offer our patients?
  • Fractional CO2 laser: a study in progress
  • Bottom line
Article PDF Media

Laparoscopic ureterolysis: Techniques and approaches for ureter identification and dissection

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:05
Display Headline
Laparoscopic ureterolysis: Techniques and approaches for ureter identification and dissection

This video was awarded the Eberhard Lotze Award at the 41st Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons.

 

Vidyard Video

 

For more videos from the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, click here

Visit the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons online: http://sgsonline.org

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. King is Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Benign Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison.

Dr. Mansuria is Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Sciences, Division of Gynecologic Specialties, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Magee Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
Cara King DO MS, Suketu Mansuria MD, video, laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, laparoscopy, minimally invasive gynecologic surgery, MIGS, ureter, laparoscopic ureterolysis, ureterolysis, ureter identification, ureter dissection, SGS, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. King is Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Benign Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison.

Dr. Mansuria is Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Sciences, Division of Gynecologic Specialties, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Magee Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. King is Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Benign Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison.

Dr. Mansuria is Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Sciences, Division of Gynecologic Specialties, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Magee Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Related Articles

This video was awarded the Eberhard Lotze Award at the 41st Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons.

 

Vidyard Video

 

For more videos from the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, click here

Visit the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons online: http://sgsonline.org

This video was awarded the Eberhard Lotze Award at the 41st Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons.

 

Vidyard Video

 

For more videos from the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, click here

Visit the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons online: http://sgsonline.org

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Laparoscopic ureterolysis: Techniques and approaches for ureter identification and dissection
Display Headline
Laparoscopic ureterolysis: Techniques and approaches for ureter identification and dissection
Legacy Keywords
Cara King DO MS, Suketu Mansuria MD, video, laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, laparoscopy, minimally invasive gynecologic surgery, MIGS, ureter, laparoscopic ureterolysis, ureterolysis, ureter identification, ureter dissection, SGS, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons
Legacy Keywords
Cara King DO MS, Suketu Mansuria MD, video, laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, laparoscopy, minimally invasive gynecologic surgery, MIGS, ureter, laparoscopic ureterolysis, ureterolysis, ureter identification, ureter dissection, SGS, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons
Sections
Inside the Article

This video is brought to you by

View more videos from SGS here

Product Update: Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
Product Update: Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System

SUPPLEMENTS FOR EXPECTANT/NEW MOMS
Premama®, a line of natural powdered drink mixes formulated to support the nutritional needs of expectant and new mothers, has introduced 2 products for preconception and postpartum health.

Fertility delivers a supplement formulation that includes myo-Inositol, which is clinically shown to help improve ovulatory function and healthy egg production, and folic acid to support prenatal health, according to Premama. Fertility is an unflavored drink mix that comes in packets of 2.2 g to be mixed with at least 12 oz of water or other noncarbonated flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies and taken daily.

Lactation is a berry-flavored drink mix daily supplement that is formulated with fenugreek, fennel seed, and blessed thistle to help support healthy milk production, according to Premama. Also included in Lactation are folic acid, Vitamin D3, calcium, and other essential nutrients for both mother and baby. A Lactation 2.5-mg packet mixes with at least 12 oz of water until blended well, or with noncarbonated, flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies.

All Premama products are physician approved, vegetarian, gluten free, and made in the United States. Premama products are available at retailers nationwide or online.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.drinkpremama.com

 

FREE EKG TRAINING APP FROM SYNDAVER
SynDaver™ Labs has released a free medical training electrocardiogram (EKG)simulator app for android devices on Google Play. The SynDaver EKG Simulator is a digital platform that can function with any medical training manikin, according to SynDaver. Currently available variables include heartbeats per minute, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, respiration rate, SpO2, and temperature. Values are displayed both numerically and by color coordinated dynamic waveform with mutable audio indicators for heart rate.

The EKG Simulator app allows for 2 android devices to be paired using Bluetooth, which, says the manufacturer, is ideal for a classroom setting because it allows the instructor to update the display remotely to modify the training scenario. Download the free EKG Simulator at http://syndaver.com/shop/new/ekg-simulator/.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.syndaver.com

 

MEDICAL SCRIBES AND CODING TOOLS
ScribeAmerica was established in 2004 as a clinical documentation solution for providers transitioning to electronic health records (EHRs). ScribeAmerica says its focus on improving the accuracy and quality of patient documentation has resulted in higher patient satisfaction scores, improved revenue cycle, and better continuity of care. 

ScribeAmerica recruits, trains, and manages over 7,300 scribes in nearly 900 locations nationwide. Certified Medical Scribes, current with all American College of Medical Scribe Specialists guidelines and testing, specialize in collecting medical data and entering it into a clinician’s EHR, resulting in improved operational workflow, claims ScribeAmerica. ScribeAmerica’s medical scribe programs are found in rural and urban hospitals, teaching facilities, private practices, and political organizations.

LiveCode Point of Service Coding is a real-time coding solution that reduces the latency in feedback and improves overall efficacy of the revenue cycle.

The Individualized Clinical Documentation Advisor (ICD-Advisor) provides custom reports tailored to the codes used most often in a specific practice. ScribeAmerica says its ICD-Advisor is fast, individualized to a practice’s needs, and affordable.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.scribeamerica.com

 

XOFT CERVICAL APPLICATOR FOR EBX
iCAD, Inc. has added a cervical applicator to the Xoft® Axxent® Electronic Brachytherapy (eBX) System® for intracavitary treatment of multiple gynecologic cancers in a minimally shielded setting. The cervical applicator is used to deliver a precise dose of radiation to larger target areas of the cervix while minimizing exposure to healthy tissue, according to iCAD. 

Using proprietary miniaturized x-ray as the radiation source, the Xoft eBX System delivers isotope-free radiation treatment in a targeted prescribed dose directly to the site where cancer recurrence is most likely, designed to minimize exposure to healthy tissue such as the bladder and rectum. The system requires minimal shielding and therefore does not require room redesign or construction investment and also allows medical personnel to remain in the room with the patient during treatment, says iCAD.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.xoftinc.com

Article PDF
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Page Number
48
Legacy Keywords
Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System
Sections
Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

SUPPLEMENTS FOR EXPECTANT/NEW MOMS
Premama®, a line of natural powdered drink mixes formulated to support the nutritional needs of expectant and new mothers, has introduced 2 products for preconception and postpartum health.

Fertility delivers a supplement formulation that includes myo-Inositol, which is clinically shown to help improve ovulatory function and healthy egg production, and folic acid to support prenatal health, according to Premama. Fertility is an unflavored drink mix that comes in packets of 2.2 g to be mixed with at least 12 oz of water or other noncarbonated flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies and taken daily.

Lactation is a berry-flavored drink mix daily supplement that is formulated with fenugreek, fennel seed, and blessed thistle to help support healthy milk production, according to Premama. Also included in Lactation are folic acid, Vitamin D3, calcium, and other essential nutrients for both mother and baby. A Lactation 2.5-mg packet mixes with at least 12 oz of water until blended well, or with noncarbonated, flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies.

All Premama products are physician approved, vegetarian, gluten free, and made in the United States. Premama products are available at retailers nationwide or online.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.drinkpremama.com

 

FREE EKG TRAINING APP FROM SYNDAVER
SynDaver™ Labs has released a free medical training electrocardiogram (EKG)simulator app for android devices on Google Play. The SynDaver EKG Simulator is a digital platform that can function with any medical training manikin, according to SynDaver. Currently available variables include heartbeats per minute, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, respiration rate, SpO2, and temperature. Values are displayed both numerically and by color coordinated dynamic waveform with mutable audio indicators for heart rate.

The EKG Simulator app allows for 2 android devices to be paired using Bluetooth, which, says the manufacturer, is ideal for a classroom setting because it allows the instructor to update the display remotely to modify the training scenario. Download the free EKG Simulator at http://syndaver.com/shop/new/ekg-simulator/.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.syndaver.com

 

MEDICAL SCRIBES AND CODING TOOLS
ScribeAmerica was established in 2004 as a clinical documentation solution for providers transitioning to electronic health records (EHRs). ScribeAmerica says its focus on improving the accuracy and quality of patient documentation has resulted in higher patient satisfaction scores, improved revenue cycle, and better continuity of care. 

ScribeAmerica recruits, trains, and manages over 7,300 scribes in nearly 900 locations nationwide. Certified Medical Scribes, current with all American College of Medical Scribe Specialists guidelines and testing, specialize in collecting medical data and entering it into a clinician’s EHR, resulting in improved operational workflow, claims ScribeAmerica. ScribeAmerica’s medical scribe programs are found in rural and urban hospitals, teaching facilities, private practices, and political organizations.

LiveCode Point of Service Coding is a real-time coding solution that reduces the latency in feedback and improves overall efficacy of the revenue cycle.

The Individualized Clinical Documentation Advisor (ICD-Advisor) provides custom reports tailored to the codes used most often in a specific practice. ScribeAmerica says its ICD-Advisor is fast, individualized to a practice’s needs, and affordable.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.scribeamerica.com

 

XOFT CERVICAL APPLICATOR FOR EBX
iCAD, Inc. has added a cervical applicator to the Xoft® Axxent® Electronic Brachytherapy (eBX) System® for intracavitary treatment of multiple gynecologic cancers in a minimally shielded setting. The cervical applicator is used to deliver a precise dose of radiation to larger target areas of the cervix while minimizing exposure to healthy tissue, according to iCAD. 

Using proprietary miniaturized x-ray as the radiation source, the Xoft eBX System delivers isotope-free radiation treatment in a targeted prescribed dose directly to the site where cancer recurrence is most likely, designed to minimize exposure to healthy tissue such as the bladder and rectum. The system requires minimal shielding and therefore does not require room redesign or construction investment and also allows medical personnel to remain in the room with the patient during treatment, says iCAD.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.xoftinc.com

SUPPLEMENTS FOR EXPECTANT/NEW MOMS
Premama®, a line of natural powdered drink mixes formulated to support the nutritional needs of expectant and new mothers, has introduced 2 products for preconception and postpartum health.

Fertility delivers a supplement formulation that includes myo-Inositol, which is clinically shown to help improve ovulatory function and healthy egg production, and folic acid to support prenatal health, according to Premama. Fertility is an unflavored drink mix that comes in packets of 2.2 g to be mixed with at least 12 oz of water or other noncarbonated flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies and taken daily.

Lactation is a berry-flavored drink mix daily supplement that is formulated with fenugreek, fennel seed, and blessed thistle to help support healthy milk production, according to Premama. Also included in Lactation are folic acid, Vitamin D3, calcium, and other essential nutrients for both mother and baby. A Lactation 2.5-mg packet mixes with at least 12 oz of water until blended well, or with noncarbonated, flavored liquids such as juices or smoothies.

All Premama products are physician approved, vegetarian, gluten free, and made in the United States. Premama products are available at retailers nationwide or online.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.drinkpremama.com

 

FREE EKG TRAINING APP FROM SYNDAVER
SynDaver™ Labs has released a free medical training electrocardiogram (EKG)simulator app for android devices on Google Play. The SynDaver EKG Simulator is a digital platform that can function with any medical training manikin, according to SynDaver. Currently available variables include heartbeats per minute, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, respiration rate, SpO2, and temperature. Values are displayed both numerically and by color coordinated dynamic waveform with mutable audio indicators for heart rate.

The EKG Simulator app allows for 2 android devices to be paired using Bluetooth, which, says the manufacturer, is ideal for a classroom setting because it allows the instructor to update the display remotely to modify the training scenario. Download the free EKG Simulator at http://syndaver.com/shop/new/ekg-simulator/.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.syndaver.com

 

MEDICAL SCRIBES AND CODING TOOLS
ScribeAmerica was established in 2004 as a clinical documentation solution for providers transitioning to electronic health records (EHRs). ScribeAmerica says its focus on improving the accuracy and quality of patient documentation has resulted in higher patient satisfaction scores, improved revenue cycle, and better continuity of care. 

ScribeAmerica recruits, trains, and manages over 7,300 scribes in nearly 900 locations nationwide. Certified Medical Scribes, current with all American College of Medical Scribe Specialists guidelines and testing, specialize in collecting medical data and entering it into a clinician’s EHR, resulting in improved operational workflow, claims ScribeAmerica. ScribeAmerica’s medical scribe programs are found in rural and urban hospitals, teaching facilities, private practices, and political organizations.

LiveCode Point of Service Coding is a real-time coding solution that reduces the latency in feedback and improves overall efficacy of the revenue cycle.

The Individualized Clinical Documentation Advisor (ICD-Advisor) provides custom reports tailored to the codes used most often in a specific practice. ScribeAmerica says its ICD-Advisor is fast, individualized to a practice’s needs, and affordable.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.scribeamerica.com

 

XOFT CERVICAL APPLICATOR FOR EBX
iCAD, Inc. has added a cervical applicator to the Xoft® Axxent® Electronic Brachytherapy (eBX) System® for intracavitary treatment of multiple gynecologic cancers in a minimally shielded setting. The cervical applicator is used to deliver a precise dose of radiation to larger target areas of the cervix while minimizing exposure to healthy tissue, according to iCAD. 

Using proprietary miniaturized x-ray as the radiation source, the Xoft eBX System delivers isotope-free radiation treatment in a targeted prescribed dose directly to the site where cancer recurrence is most likely, designed to minimize exposure to healthy tissue such as the bladder and rectum. The system requires minimal shielding and therefore does not require room redesign or construction investment and also allows medical personnel to remain in the room with the patient during treatment, says iCAD.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT www.xoftinc.com

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
48
Page Number
48
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Product Update: Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System
Display Headline
Product Update: Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System
Legacy Keywords
Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System
Legacy Keywords
Premama, SynDaver, ScribeAmerica, Xoft eBX System
Sections
Article PDF Media

Why is breast density a weighty matter?

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 18:03
Display Headline
Why is breast density a weighty matter?

 

Dense breasts are composed of a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, with less adipose tissue. Heterogeneously dense and extremely dense breast tissue (as illustrated here) make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography, and women with dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer.

Case: Patient seeks clarification and next steps on her breast density classification
Your patient, a 51-year-old postmenopausal woman (G0P0) in good health, had an annual screening mammogram that showed no evidence of malignancy. She is white and has a mother with a history of breast cancer. She has never had a breast biopsy. Following the mammogram, she received a letter from the imaging center, stating:

 

Your mammogram indicates that you have extremely dense breasts. Dense breast tissue is common and found in more than 40% of women. However, dense breast tissue can make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography and dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer. This information is being provided to raise your awareness and to encourage you to discuss with your health care providers your dense breast tissue and other breast cancer risk factors. Together you and your clinicians can decide if additional screening options are right for you.

She calls your office and asks, “What should I do next?”

Breasts are composed of fibrous, glandular, and adipose tissue. If the breasts contain a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, and little adipose tissue, they are considered to be “dense.” Using mammography, the current standard is to report the density of breast tissue using 4 categories:

 

  • almost entirely fatty
  • scattered fibroglandular densities
  • heterogeneously dense
  • extremely dense.

Dense breast tissue is defined to include the 2 categories heterogeneously dense and extremely dense.

Observational studies have reported that dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, and dense breast tissue makes it more difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography. According to data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, among women aged 50 or older, the relative risk of breast cancer stratified by the 4 categories of breast density is 0.59, 1.00, 1.46, and 1.77, for almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense, respectively.1 In one study, the sensitivity of mammography to detect breast cancer was 82% to 88% for women with nondense breasts and 62% to 69% in women with dense breasts.2 These data have catalyzed investigators to explore the use of supplemental imaging to enhance cancer detection in women with dense breasts.

The link between breast density and breast cancer risk and reduced sensitivity of mammography also has catalyzed activists and legislators to champion breast density notification laws, which have passed in more than 20 states. These laws require facilities that perform mammography to notify women with dense breasts that this finding is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and that dense breasts reduce the ability of mammography to detect cancer. In some states, the law mandates that women with dense breasts be offered supplemental ultrasound imaging and that insurers must cover the cost of the ultrasound studies. Many of the laws recommend that the patient discuss the situation with the clinician who ordered the mammogram.

When I first saw the recommendation for patients to contact me about how to manage dense breasts, my initial response was, “Who? Me?” I felt ill equipped to provide any useful advice and suspected that many of my patients knew more than I about this issue.

Based on a review of the evidence, my current clinical recommendation is outlined in the 2 options below, including a low-resource utilization option and a high-resource utilization option. For patients, physicians, and health systems that are concerned that excessive breast cancer screening tests might cause more harm than benefit, the identification of dense breasts on mammogram is unlikely to be a trigger to perform any additional testing. In this situation, the pragmatic low-resource option is most relevant.

Alternatively, for patients and physicians who strongly believe in the value of screening mammography (see “Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients” below), a reasonable strategy is to recommend that women with dense breasts and an increased risk for breast cancer be offered supplemental imaging.

In this editorial I elaborate these 2 approaches to breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts.
 

 

Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients

Mammograms are the primary modality used for breast cancer screening because screening mammography has been shown to reduce breast cancer deaths by 15% to 30%.1,2 Annual or biennial mammograms are recommended for women aged 40 years or older by many professional organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Radiology. However, mammography screening programs have been criticized because of false-positive tests resulting in unnecessary biopsies, limited sensitivity, and the theoretical risk of over-diagnosing clinically insignificant cancers.3,4

Mammography technology continues to evolve. Film-based mammography has been replaced by digital mammography. Tomosynthesis digital mammography, also known as 3-D mammography, is now replacing standard digital mammography.5

With tomosynthesis, digital mammography image acquisition is performed using an x-ray source that moves through an arc across the breast with the capture of a series of images from different angles and reconstruction of the data into thin slices approximately 1 mm in width. The presentation of breast images in thin slices permits superior detection of lesions. In addition, the collected images can be reconstructed to present a virtual 2-D image for analysis.

Tomosynthesis has been demonstrated to increase the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer and reduce false-positive examinations. In a study of 454,850 mammography examinations, investigators found that the invasive cancer detection rate per 1,000 studies increased from 2.9 with standard digital mammography to 4.1 with tomosynthesis.6

Tomosynthesis also reduces the patient recall rate to perform additional views or subsequent ultrasound. In one large study, the recall rate was 12% for standard digital mammography and 8.4% for tomosynthesis.7

The limitations of tomosynthesis include higher costs and higher radiation doses.

If the technology is available, I recommend that women have their mammograms using the best technology, tomosynthesis digital mammography.8

References
1. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42(5):793–806.
2. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778–1786.
3. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716–726, W-236.

4. Welch HG, Passow HJ. Quantifying the benefits and harms of screening mammograms. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(3):448–454.
5. Destounis SV, Morgan R, Areino A. Screening for dense breasts: digital tomosynthesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(2):261–264.

6. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA. 2014;311(24):2499–2507.
7. Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology. 2013;269(3):694–700
.
8. Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ. Breast cancer screening: should tomosynthesis replace digital mammography? JAMA. 2014;311(24):2488–2489.

 

 


A pragmatic, low-resource utilization screening approach for women with dense breasts
There are no published randomized clinical trials that provide high-quality evidence on what to do if dense breasts are identified on mammography.3 Authors of observational studies have evaluated the potential role of supplemental imaging, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in the management of dense breast tissue (see “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” below). Supplemental imaging involves complex trade-offs, balancing the potential benefit of identifying occult early breast cancer lesions not identified by mammography with the risk of subjecting many women without cancer to additional testing and unnecessary biopsies.

A pragmatic, low-resource utilization plan for women with dense breasts involves emphasizing that mammography is the best available screening tool and that annual or biennial mammography is the foundation of all current approaches to breast cancer screening. Supplemental imaging is unnecessary with this approach because there is no evidence that it reduces breast cancer mortality. There is, however, substantial evidence that using supplemental imaging for all women with dense breasts will result in little benefit and great costs, including many unnecessary biopsies.1,4 Women with dense breasts also could consider annual clinical breast examination.

 

 

Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are available as supplemental imaging, although ultrasound is the only supplemental imaging test that is specifically approved for women with dense breasts. Among the clinically available imaging modalities, MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers.

Ultrasound
In women with dense breasts, ultrasound can detect another 3 to 4 cancers that were not detected by mammography. However, ultrasound imaging generates many false positive results that lead to additional biopsies. According to one analysis, compared with mammography alone, mammography plus ultrasound would prevent 0.36 breast cancer deaths and cause 354 additional biopsies per 1,000 women with dense breasts screened biennially for 25 years.1

Ultrasound commonly is used to follow up an abnormal mammogram to further evaluate masses and differentiate cysts from solid tumors. Ultrasound is also a useful breast-imaging tool for women who are pregnant. In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration approved an automated breast ultrasound device to be used for supplemental imaging of asymptomatic women with dense breasts and a mammogram negative for cancer. This device may facilitate the use of ultrasound for supplemental imaging of women with dense breasts on mammography.

Magnetic resonance imaging
MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers of any clinically available modality.

It is almost never covered by insurance for women whose only breast cancer risk factor is the identification of dense breasts on mammography. The cost of MRI testing is, however, typically covered for women at very high risk for breast cancer.

Women who are known to be at very high risk for breast cancer should begin annual clinical breast examinations at age 25 years and alternate between screening mammography and screening MRI every 6 months or annually. These women include:

 

  • carriers of clinically significant BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations
  • carriers of other high-risk genetic mutations such as Cowden syndrome (PTEN mutation), Lai-Fraumeni syndrome (TP53 mutation), and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome
  • genetically untested women with a first-degree relative with a BRCA mutation.

Women who had thoracic radiation before age 30 also should be considered for this screening protocol beginning 8 to 10 years after the radiation exposure or at age 25 years.2

References
1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.
2. CRICO Breast Care Management Algorithm. CRICO; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 2014. https://www.rmf.harvard.edu/~/media/Files/_Global/KC/PDFs/Guidelines/cricormfbca2014_locked.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2015.


A high-resource utilization screening approach
There are no randomized trials to help guide recommendations about how to respond to a finding of dense breasts on mammography. In addition to breast density, many factors influence breast cancer risk, including a patient’s:

 

  • age
  • family history
  • history of previous breast biopsies
  • many reproductive factors, including early age of menarche and late childbearing.

Women with both dense breasts and an increased risk of breast cancer may reap the greatest benefit from supplemental imaging, such as ultrasonography. Therefore, a two-step approach can help.

Step 1: Assess breast cancer risk. This can be accomplished using one of many calculators. Three that are commonly used are the:

 

  • National Cancer Institute (NCI) Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) calculator5
  • NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, Gail model (BRCAT)6
  • IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool (Tyrer-Cuzick model).7

The BCSC calculator uses age, race/ethnicity, first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of a breast biopsy, and breast density to calculate a 5-year risk of developing breast cancer.

 

 

The BCRAT tool uses current age, race/ethnicity, age at menarche, age at first live-birth of a child, number of first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of breast biopsies, and the identification of atypical hyperplasia to calculate a 5-year risk of breast cancer.

The IBIS model uses many more variables, including a detailed family history to calculate a 10-year and lifetime risk of breast cancer. If a patient has ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular carcinoma in situ, chest irradiation before age 30 years, or known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, she is instructed not to use the risk calculators because they are at very high risk for breast cancer, and they need an individualized intensive plan for monitoring and prevention (see MRI section in “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” above).

Step 2: Use breast density and breast cancer risk to develop a screening plan. The NIH Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium has published data estimating the risk that a woman with a mammogram negative for cancer will develop breast cancer within the next 12 months (based on her age, breast density, and breast cancer risk—calculated with the BCSC tool).8

It reported an increased risk of breast cancer diagnosed within 12 months following a mammogram that was negative for cancer in women with extremely dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 1.67% or greater and in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.5% or greater.8

Using these cutoffs it is estimated that 24% of all women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts would be offered supplemental screening with a modality such as ultrasound, and 76% would be guided not to have supplemental screening because their risk of developing breast cancer in the 12 months following their negative mammogram is low.

If this guidance is followed, it would require 694 supplemental ultrasound studies and many biopsies to detect 1 additional breast cancer, significantly increasing overall health care costs.8 In many states insurers do not cover supplemental ultrasound imaging of the breasts. In most states insurers require preauthorization for supplemental MRI of the breasts. You need to know the insurance practices in the state to help guide decision making about supplemental imaging. The approach described above is consistent with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendation that women with dense breasts, who are asymptomaticand have no additional risk factors for breast cancer, do not need to be offered supplemental imaging.9

Case: Next steps
The BCSC calculator reveals that the 51-year-old woman with a family history of breast cancer and a mammogram showing extremely dense breasts has a 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.68%. Given that this risk is elevated, this patient could be offered supplemental ultrasound screening and annual breast clinical examination. In addition, she could be further counseled about breast cancer chemoprevention options.10

Women with a strong family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer also could be referred for genetic counseling and BRCA testing.11 The risk of having a BRCA mutation can be calculated using the BRCAPRO tool.12

Most women with dense breast tissue on mammography will never develop breast cancer. Yet the presence of dense breast tissue both increases the risk of breast cancer and decreases the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer. There are no high-quality data from randomized trials to help guide our recommendations concerning the management of dense breasts identified on mammography. Yet many states have laws that suggest patients ask you to provide advice about breast density.

Patients, clinicians, and health systems vary in their confidence in the clinical value of breast cancer screening programs. Consequently, there is no “right answer” to this vexing problem. The standard of care is to support a range of options tailored to the specific clinical characteristics and needs of each patient. 
 

 

Instant Poll
Many states mandate that patients receive letters from their mammography center that report on breast density. In many states the law requires that the letter contain a statement that dense breasts increase the risk of breast cancer and reduce the ability of mammography to detect breast cancer. Do you believe these letters:

 

a) cause significant harm by raising patient anxiety and increasing the use of unnecessary tests
b) are beneficial because they provide the patient important information
c) both a and b

To weigh in and send your Letter to the Editor, visit obgmanagement.com and look for the “Quick Poll” on the right side of the home page.

References

 

1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.

2. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):168–175.

3. Gartlehner G, Thaler K, Chapman A, et al. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD009632.

4. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs. mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299(18):2151–2163.

5. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk calculator. BCSC Web site. https://tools.bcsc-scc.org/BC5yearRisk/intro.htm. Updated February 13, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

6. NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model). National Cancer Institute Web site. http://www.cancer.gov/BCRISKTOOL/. Accessed July 17, 2015.

7. IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool. http://www.ems-trials.org/riskevaluator/. Updated January 9, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

8. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(10):673–681.

9. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee Opinion No. 625: Management of women with dense breasts diagnosed by mammography. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3): 750–751.

10. Visvanathan K, Hurley P, Bantug E, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(34):2942–2962.

11. Profato JL, Arun BK. Genetic risk assessment for breast and gynecological malignancies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;27(1):1–5.

12. BRCAPRO. BayesMendel Lab. Harvard University Web site. http://bcb.dfci.harvard.edu/bayesmendel/brcapro.php. Accessed July 19, 2015.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

 

Robert L. Barbieri, MD

Dr. Barbieri is Editor in Chief, OBG Management; Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; and Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
7–11
Legacy Keywords
Robert L. Barbieri MD, dense breasts, breast density, mammogram, screening mammography, breast density classification, extremely dense breasts, almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense breasts, increased risk of breast cancer, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium calculator, BCSC, nondense breasts, supplemental ultrasound, ultrasonography, tomosynthesis, digital mammography, ACOG, American College of Radiology, false-positive test results, 3-D mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, breast biopsy, reproductive factors, early age at menarche, late childbearing, National Cancer Institute, NCI, Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool Gail model, BRCAT, IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool, Tyrer-Cuzick model,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

 

Robert L. Barbieri, MD

Dr. Barbieri is Editor in Chief, OBG Management; Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; and Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

 

Robert L. Barbieri, MD

Dr. Barbieri is Editor in Chief, OBG Management; Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; and Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

 

Dense breasts are composed of a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, with less adipose tissue. Heterogeneously dense and extremely dense breast tissue (as illustrated here) make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography, and women with dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer.

Case: Patient seeks clarification and next steps on her breast density classification
Your patient, a 51-year-old postmenopausal woman (G0P0) in good health, had an annual screening mammogram that showed no evidence of malignancy. She is white and has a mother with a history of breast cancer. She has never had a breast biopsy. Following the mammogram, she received a letter from the imaging center, stating:

 

Your mammogram indicates that you have extremely dense breasts. Dense breast tissue is common and found in more than 40% of women. However, dense breast tissue can make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography and dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer. This information is being provided to raise your awareness and to encourage you to discuss with your health care providers your dense breast tissue and other breast cancer risk factors. Together you and your clinicians can decide if additional screening options are right for you.

She calls your office and asks, “What should I do next?”

Breasts are composed of fibrous, glandular, and adipose tissue. If the breasts contain a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, and little adipose tissue, they are considered to be “dense.” Using mammography, the current standard is to report the density of breast tissue using 4 categories:

 

  • almost entirely fatty
  • scattered fibroglandular densities
  • heterogeneously dense
  • extremely dense.

Dense breast tissue is defined to include the 2 categories heterogeneously dense and extremely dense.

Observational studies have reported that dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, and dense breast tissue makes it more difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography. According to data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, among women aged 50 or older, the relative risk of breast cancer stratified by the 4 categories of breast density is 0.59, 1.00, 1.46, and 1.77, for almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense, respectively.1 In one study, the sensitivity of mammography to detect breast cancer was 82% to 88% for women with nondense breasts and 62% to 69% in women with dense breasts.2 These data have catalyzed investigators to explore the use of supplemental imaging to enhance cancer detection in women with dense breasts.

The link between breast density and breast cancer risk and reduced sensitivity of mammography also has catalyzed activists and legislators to champion breast density notification laws, which have passed in more than 20 states. These laws require facilities that perform mammography to notify women with dense breasts that this finding is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and that dense breasts reduce the ability of mammography to detect cancer. In some states, the law mandates that women with dense breasts be offered supplemental ultrasound imaging and that insurers must cover the cost of the ultrasound studies. Many of the laws recommend that the patient discuss the situation with the clinician who ordered the mammogram.

When I first saw the recommendation for patients to contact me about how to manage dense breasts, my initial response was, “Who? Me?” I felt ill equipped to provide any useful advice and suspected that many of my patients knew more than I about this issue.

Based on a review of the evidence, my current clinical recommendation is outlined in the 2 options below, including a low-resource utilization option and a high-resource utilization option. For patients, physicians, and health systems that are concerned that excessive breast cancer screening tests might cause more harm than benefit, the identification of dense breasts on mammogram is unlikely to be a trigger to perform any additional testing. In this situation, the pragmatic low-resource option is most relevant.

Alternatively, for patients and physicians who strongly believe in the value of screening mammography (see “Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients” below), a reasonable strategy is to recommend that women with dense breasts and an increased risk for breast cancer be offered supplemental imaging.

In this editorial I elaborate these 2 approaches to breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts.
 

 

Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients

Mammograms are the primary modality used for breast cancer screening because screening mammography has been shown to reduce breast cancer deaths by 15% to 30%.1,2 Annual or biennial mammograms are recommended for women aged 40 years or older by many professional organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Radiology. However, mammography screening programs have been criticized because of false-positive tests resulting in unnecessary biopsies, limited sensitivity, and the theoretical risk of over-diagnosing clinically insignificant cancers.3,4

Mammography technology continues to evolve. Film-based mammography has been replaced by digital mammography. Tomosynthesis digital mammography, also known as 3-D mammography, is now replacing standard digital mammography.5

With tomosynthesis, digital mammography image acquisition is performed using an x-ray source that moves through an arc across the breast with the capture of a series of images from different angles and reconstruction of the data into thin slices approximately 1 mm in width. The presentation of breast images in thin slices permits superior detection of lesions. In addition, the collected images can be reconstructed to present a virtual 2-D image for analysis.

Tomosynthesis has been demonstrated to increase the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer and reduce false-positive examinations. In a study of 454,850 mammography examinations, investigators found that the invasive cancer detection rate per 1,000 studies increased from 2.9 with standard digital mammography to 4.1 with tomosynthesis.6

Tomosynthesis also reduces the patient recall rate to perform additional views or subsequent ultrasound. In one large study, the recall rate was 12% for standard digital mammography and 8.4% for tomosynthesis.7

The limitations of tomosynthesis include higher costs and higher radiation doses.

If the technology is available, I recommend that women have their mammograms using the best technology, tomosynthesis digital mammography.8

References
1. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42(5):793–806.
2. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778–1786.
3. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716–726, W-236.

4. Welch HG, Passow HJ. Quantifying the benefits and harms of screening mammograms. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(3):448–454.
5. Destounis SV, Morgan R, Areino A. Screening for dense breasts: digital tomosynthesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(2):261–264.

6. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA. 2014;311(24):2499–2507.
7. Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology. 2013;269(3):694–700
.
8. Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ. Breast cancer screening: should tomosynthesis replace digital mammography? JAMA. 2014;311(24):2488–2489.

 

 


A pragmatic, low-resource utilization screening approach for women with dense breasts
There are no published randomized clinical trials that provide high-quality evidence on what to do if dense breasts are identified on mammography.3 Authors of observational studies have evaluated the potential role of supplemental imaging, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in the management of dense breast tissue (see “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” below). Supplemental imaging involves complex trade-offs, balancing the potential benefit of identifying occult early breast cancer lesions not identified by mammography with the risk of subjecting many women without cancer to additional testing and unnecessary biopsies.

A pragmatic, low-resource utilization plan for women with dense breasts involves emphasizing that mammography is the best available screening tool and that annual or biennial mammography is the foundation of all current approaches to breast cancer screening. Supplemental imaging is unnecessary with this approach because there is no evidence that it reduces breast cancer mortality. There is, however, substantial evidence that using supplemental imaging for all women with dense breasts will result in little benefit and great costs, including many unnecessary biopsies.1,4 Women with dense breasts also could consider annual clinical breast examination.

 

 

Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are available as supplemental imaging, although ultrasound is the only supplemental imaging test that is specifically approved for women with dense breasts. Among the clinically available imaging modalities, MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers.

Ultrasound
In women with dense breasts, ultrasound can detect another 3 to 4 cancers that were not detected by mammography. However, ultrasound imaging generates many false positive results that lead to additional biopsies. According to one analysis, compared with mammography alone, mammography plus ultrasound would prevent 0.36 breast cancer deaths and cause 354 additional biopsies per 1,000 women with dense breasts screened biennially for 25 years.1

Ultrasound commonly is used to follow up an abnormal mammogram to further evaluate masses and differentiate cysts from solid tumors. Ultrasound is also a useful breast-imaging tool for women who are pregnant. In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration approved an automated breast ultrasound device to be used for supplemental imaging of asymptomatic women with dense breasts and a mammogram negative for cancer. This device may facilitate the use of ultrasound for supplemental imaging of women with dense breasts on mammography.

Magnetic resonance imaging
MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers of any clinically available modality.

It is almost never covered by insurance for women whose only breast cancer risk factor is the identification of dense breasts on mammography. The cost of MRI testing is, however, typically covered for women at very high risk for breast cancer.

Women who are known to be at very high risk for breast cancer should begin annual clinical breast examinations at age 25 years and alternate between screening mammography and screening MRI every 6 months or annually. These women include:

 

  • carriers of clinically significant BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations
  • carriers of other high-risk genetic mutations such as Cowden syndrome (PTEN mutation), Lai-Fraumeni syndrome (TP53 mutation), and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome
  • genetically untested women with a first-degree relative with a BRCA mutation.

Women who had thoracic radiation before age 30 also should be considered for this screening protocol beginning 8 to 10 years after the radiation exposure or at age 25 years.2

References
1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.
2. CRICO Breast Care Management Algorithm. CRICO; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 2014. https://www.rmf.harvard.edu/~/media/Files/_Global/KC/PDFs/Guidelines/cricormfbca2014_locked.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2015.


A high-resource utilization screening approach
There are no randomized trials to help guide recommendations about how to respond to a finding of dense breasts on mammography. In addition to breast density, many factors influence breast cancer risk, including a patient’s:

 

  • age
  • family history
  • history of previous breast biopsies
  • many reproductive factors, including early age of menarche and late childbearing.

Women with both dense breasts and an increased risk of breast cancer may reap the greatest benefit from supplemental imaging, such as ultrasonography. Therefore, a two-step approach can help.

Step 1: Assess breast cancer risk. This can be accomplished using one of many calculators. Three that are commonly used are the:

 

  • National Cancer Institute (NCI) Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) calculator5
  • NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, Gail model (BRCAT)6
  • IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool (Tyrer-Cuzick model).7

The BCSC calculator uses age, race/ethnicity, first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of a breast biopsy, and breast density to calculate a 5-year risk of developing breast cancer.

 

 

The BCRAT tool uses current age, race/ethnicity, age at menarche, age at first live-birth of a child, number of first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of breast biopsies, and the identification of atypical hyperplasia to calculate a 5-year risk of breast cancer.

The IBIS model uses many more variables, including a detailed family history to calculate a 10-year and lifetime risk of breast cancer. If a patient has ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular carcinoma in situ, chest irradiation before age 30 years, or known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, she is instructed not to use the risk calculators because they are at very high risk for breast cancer, and they need an individualized intensive plan for monitoring and prevention (see MRI section in “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” above).

Step 2: Use breast density and breast cancer risk to develop a screening plan. The NIH Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium has published data estimating the risk that a woman with a mammogram negative for cancer will develop breast cancer within the next 12 months (based on her age, breast density, and breast cancer risk—calculated with the BCSC tool).8

It reported an increased risk of breast cancer diagnosed within 12 months following a mammogram that was negative for cancer in women with extremely dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 1.67% or greater and in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.5% or greater.8

Using these cutoffs it is estimated that 24% of all women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts would be offered supplemental screening with a modality such as ultrasound, and 76% would be guided not to have supplemental screening because their risk of developing breast cancer in the 12 months following their negative mammogram is low.

If this guidance is followed, it would require 694 supplemental ultrasound studies and many biopsies to detect 1 additional breast cancer, significantly increasing overall health care costs.8 In many states insurers do not cover supplemental ultrasound imaging of the breasts. In most states insurers require preauthorization for supplemental MRI of the breasts. You need to know the insurance practices in the state to help guide decision making about supplemental imaging. The approach described above is consistent with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendation that women with dense breasts, who are asymptomaticand have no additional risk factors for breast cancer, do not need to be offered supplemental imaging.9

Case: Next steps
The BCSC calculator reveals that the 51-year-old woman with a family history of breast cancer and a mammogram showing extremely dense breasts has a 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.68%. Given that this risk is elevated, this patient could be offered supplemental ultrasound screening and annual breast clinical examination. In addition, she could be further counseled about breast cancer chemoprevention options.10

Women with a strong family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer also could be referred for genetic counseling and BRCA testing.11 The risk of having a BRCA mutation can be calculated using the BRCAPRO tool.12

Most women with dense breast tissue on mammography will never develop breast cancer. Yet the presence of dense breast tissue both increases the risk of breast cancer and decreases the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer. There are no high-quality data from randomized trials to help guide our recommendations concerning the management of dense breasts identified on mammography. Yet many states have laws that suggest patients ask you to provide advice about breast density.

Patients, clinicians, and health systems vary in their confidence in the clinical value of breast cancer screening programs. Consequently, there is no “right answer” to this vexing problem. The standard of care is to support a range of options tailored to the specific clinical characteristics and needs of each patient. 
 

 

Instant Poll
Many states mandate that patients receive letters from their mammography center that report on breast density. In many states the law requires that the letter contain a statement that dense breasts increase the risk of breast cancer and reduce the ability of mammography to detect breast cancer. Do you believe these letters:

 

a) cause significant harm by raising patient anxiety and increasing the use of unnecessary tests
b) are beneficial because they provide the patient important information
c) both a and b

To weigh in and send your Letter to the Editor, visit obgmanagement.com and look for the “Quick Poll” on the right side of the home page.

 

Dense breasts are composed of a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, with less adipose tissue. Heterogeneously dense and extremely dense breast tissue (as illustrated here) make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography, and women with dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer.

Case: Patient seeks clarification and next steps on her breast density classification
Your patient, a 51-year-old postmenopausal woman (G0P0) in good health, had an annual screening mammogram that showed no evidence of malignancy. She is white and has a mother with a history of breast cancer. She has never had a breast biopsy. Following the mammogram, she received a letter from the imaging center, stating:

 

Your mammogram indicates that you have extremely dense breasts. Dense breast tissue is common and found in more than 40% of women. However, dense breast tissue can make it difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography and dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer. This information is being provided to raise your awareness and to encourage you to discuss with your health care providers your dense breast tissue and other breast cancer risk factors. Together you and your clinicians can decide if additional screening options are right for you.

She calls your office and asks, “What should I do next?”

Breasts are composed of fibrous, glandular, and adipose tissue. If the breasts contain a lot of fibrous and glandular tissue, and little adipose tissue, they are considered to be “dense.” Using mammography, the current standard is to report the density of breast tissue using 4 categories:

 

  • almost entirely fatty
  • scattered fibroglandular densities
  • heterogeneously dense
  • extremely dense.

Dense breast tissue is defined to include the 2 categories heterogeneously dense and extremely dense.

Observational studies have reported that dense breast tissue is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, and dense breast tissue makes it more difficult to detect breast cancer on mammography. According to data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, among women aged 50 or older, the relative risk of breast cancer stratified by the 4 categories of breast density is 0.59, 1.00, 1.46, and 1.77, for almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense, respectively.1 In one study, the sensitivity of mammography to detect breast cancer was 82% to 88% for women with nondense breasts and 62% to 69% in women with dense breasts.2 These data have catalyzed investigators to explore the use of supplemental imaging to enhance cancer detection in women with dense breasts.

The link between breast density and breast cancer risk and reduced sensitivity of mammography also has catalyzed activists and legislators to champion breast density notification laws, which have passed in more than 20 states. These laws require facilities that perform mammography to notify women with dense breasts that this finding is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and that dense breasts reduce the ability of mammography to detect cancer. In some states, the law mandates that women with dense breasts be offered supplemental ultrasound imaging and that insurers must cover the cost of the ultrasound studies. Many of the laws recommend that the patient discuss the situation with the clinician who ordered the mammogram.

When I first saw the recommendation for patients to contact me about how to manage dense breasts, my initial response was, “Who? Me?” I felt ill equipped to provide any useful advice and suspected that many of my patients knew more than I about this issue.

Based on a review of the evidence, my current clinical recommendation is outlined in the 2 options below, including a low-resource utilization option and a high-resource utilization option. For patients, physicians, and health systems that are concerned that excessive breast cancer screening tests might cause more harm than benefit, the identification of dense breasts on mammogram is unlikely to be a trigger to perform any additional testing. In this situation, the pragmatic low-resource option is most relevant.

Alternatively, for patients and physicians who strongly believe in the value of screening mammography (see “Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients” below), a reasonable strategy is to recommend that women with dense breasts and an increased risk for breast cancer be offered supplemental imaging.

In this editorial I elaborate these 2 approaches to breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts.
 

 

Utilize tomosynthesis digital mammography technology for your patients

Mammograms are the primary modality used for breast cancer screening because screening mammography has been shown to reduce breast cancer deaths by 15% to 30%.1,2 Annual or biennial mammograms are recommended for women aged 40 years or older by many professional organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Radiology. However, mammography screening programs have been criticized because of false-positive tests resulting in unnecessary biopsies, limited sensitivity, and the theoretical risk of over-diagnosing clinically insignificant cancers.3,4

Mammography technology continues to evolve. Film-based mammography has been replaced by digital mammography. Tomosynthesis digital mammography, also known as 3-D mammography, is now replacing standard digital mammography.5

With tomosynthesis, digital mammography image acquisition is performed using an x-ray source that moves through an arc across the breast with the capture of a series of images from different angles and reconstruction of the data into thin slices approximately 1 mm in width. The presentation of breast images in thin slices permits superior detection of lesions. In addition, the collected images can be reconstructed to present a virtual 2-D image for analysis.

Tomosynthesis has been demonstrated to increase the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer and reduce false-positive examinations. In a study of 454,850 mammography examinations, investigators found that the invasive cancer detection rate per 1,000 studies increased from 2.9 with standard digital mammography to 4.1 with tomosynthesis.6

Tomosynthesis also reduces the patient recall rate to perform additional views or subsequent ultrasound. In one large study, the recall rate was 12% for standard digital mammography and 8.4% for tomosynthesis.7

The limitations of tomosynthesis include higher costs and higher radiation doses.

If the technology is available, I recommend that women have their mammograms using the best technology, tomosynthesis digital mammography.8

References
1. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42(5):793–806.
2. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778–1786.
3. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716–726, W-236.

4. Welch HG, Passow HJ. Quantifying the benefits and harms of screening mammograms. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(3):448–454.
5. Destounis SV, Morgan R, Areino A. Screening for dense breasts: digital tomosynthesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(2):261–264.

6. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA. 2014;311(24):2499–2507.
7. Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology. 2013;269(3):694–700
.
8. Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ. Breast cancer screening: should tomosynthesis replace digital mammography? JAMA. 2014;311(24):2488–2489.

 

 


A pragmatic, low-resource utilization screening approach for women with dense breasts
There are no published randomized clinical trials that provide high-quality evidence on what to do if dense breasts are identified on mammography.3 Authors of observational studies have evaluated the potential role of supplemental imaging, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in the management of dense breast tissue (see “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” below). Supplemental imaging involves complex trade-offs, balancing the potential benefit of identifying occult early breast cancer lesions not identified by mammography with the risk of subjecting many women without cancer to additional testing and unnecessary biopsies.

A pragmatic, low-resource utilization plan for women with dense breasts involves emphasizing that mammography is the best available screening tool and that annual or biennial mammography is the foundation of all current approaches to breast cancer screening. Supplemental imaging is unnecessary with this approach because there is no evidence that it reduces breast cancer mortality. There is, however, substantial evidence that using supplemental imaging for all women with dense breasts will result in little benefit and great costs, including many unnecessary biopsies.1,4 Women with dense breasts also could consider annual clinical breast examination.

 

 

Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are available as supplemental imaging, although ultrasound is the only supplemental imaging test that is specifically approved for women with dense breasts. Among the clinically available imaging modalities, MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers.

Ultrasound
In women with dense breasts, ultrasound can detect another 3 to 4 cancers that were not detected by mammography. However, ultrasound imaging generates many false positive results that lead to additional biopsies. According to one analysis, compared with mammography alone, mammography plus ultrasound would prevent 0.36 breast cancer deaths and cause 354 additional biopsies per 1,000 women with dense breasts screened biennially for 25 years.1

Ultrasound commonly is used to follow up an abnormal mammogram to further evaluate masses and differentiate cysts from solid tumors. Ultrasound is also a useful breast-imaging tool for women who are pregnant. In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration approved an automated breast ultrasound device to be used for supplemental imaging of asymptomatic women with dense breasts and a mammogram negative for cancer. This device may facilitate the use of ultrasound for supplemental imaging of women with dense breasts on mammography.

Magnetic resonance imaging
MRI can detect the greatest number of cancers of any clinically available modality.

It is almost never covered by insurance for women whose only breast cancer risk factor is the identification of dense breasts on mammography. The cost of MRI testing is, however, typically covered for women at very high risk for breast cancer.

Women who are known to be at very high risk for breast cancer should begin annual clinical breast examinations at age 25 years and alternate between screening mammography and screening MRI every 6 months or annually. These women include:

 

  • carriers of clinically significant BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations
  • carriers of other high-risk genetic mutations such as Cowden syndrome (PTEN mutation), Lai-Fraumeni syndrome (TP53 mutation), and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome
  • genetically untested women with a first-degree relative with a BRCA mutation.

Women who had thoracic radiation before age 30 also should be considered for this screening protocol beginning 8 to 10 years after the radiation exposure or at age 25 years.2

References
1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.
2. CRICO Breast Care Management Algorithm. CRICO; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 2014. https://www.rmf.harvard.edu/~/media/Files/_Global/KC/PDFs/Guidelines/cricormfbca2014_locked.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2015.


A high-resource utilization screening approach
There are no randomized trials to help guide recommendations about how to respond to a finding of dense breasts on mammography. In addition to breast density, many factors influence breast cancer risk, including a patient’s:

 

  • age
  • family history
  • history of previous breast biopsies
  • many reproductive factors, including early age of menarche and late childbearing.

Women with both dense breasts and an increased risk of breast cancer may reap the greatest benefit from supplemental imaging, such as ultrasonography. Therefore, a two-step approach can help.

Step 1: Assess breast cancer risk. This can be accomplished using one of many calculators. Three that are commonly used are the:

 

  • National Cancer Institute (NCI) Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) calculator5
  • NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, Gail model (BRCAT)6
  • IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool (Tyrer-Cuzick model).7

The BCSC calculator uses age, race/ethnicity, first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of a breast biopsy, and breast density to calculate a 5-year risk of developing breast cancer.

 

 

The BCRAT tool uses current age, race/ethnicity, age at menarche, age at first live-birth of a child, number of first-degree relatives with breast cancer, a history of breast biopsies, and the identification of atypical hyperplasia to calculate a 5-year risk of breast cancer.

The IBIS model uses many more variables, including a detailed family history to calculate a 10-year and lifetime risk of breast cancer. If a patient has ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular carcinoma in situ, chest irradiation before age 30 years, or known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, she is instructed not to use the risk calculators because they are at very high risk for breast cancer, and they need an individualized intensive plan for monitoring and prevention (see MRI section in “Supplemental breast cancer screening modalities” above).

Step 2: Use breast density and breast cancer risk to develop a screening plan. The NIH Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium has published data estimating the risk that a woman with a mammogram negative for cancer will develop breast cancer within the next 12 months (based on her age, breast density, and breast cancer risk—calculated with the BCSC tool).8

It reported an increased risk of breast cancer diagnosed within 12 months following a mammogram that was negative for cancer in women with extremely dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 1.67% or greater and in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a BCSC 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.5% or greater.8

Using these cutoffs it is estimated that 24% of all women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts would be offered supplemental screening with a modality such as ultrasound, and 76% would be guided not to have supplemental screening because their risk of developing breast cancer in the 12 months following their negative mammogram is low.

If this guidance is followed, it would require 694 supplemental ultrasound studies and many biopsies to detect 1 additional breast cancer, significantly increasing overall health care costs.8 In many states insurers do not cover supplemental ultrasound imaging of the breasts. In most states insurers require preauthorization for supplemental MRI of the breasts. You need to know the insurance practices in the state to help guide decision making about supplemental imaging. The approach described above is consistent with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendation that women with dense breasts, who are asymptomaticand have no additional risk factors for breast cancer, do not need to be offered supplemental imaging.9

Case: Next steps
The BCSC calculator reveals that the 51-year-old woman with a family history of breast cancer and a mammogram showing extremely dense breasts has a 5-year risk of breast cancer of 2.68%. Given that this risk is elevated, this patient could be offered supplemental ultrasound screening and annual breast clinical examination. In addition, she could be further counseled about breast cancer chemoprevention options.10

Women with a strong family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer also could be referred for genetic counseling and BRCA testing.11 The risk of having a BRCA mutation can be calculated using the BRCAPRO tool.12

Most women with dense breast tissue on mammography will never develop breast cancer. Yet the presence of dense breast tissue both increases the risk of breast cancer and decreases the sensitivity of mammography to detect cancer. There are no high-quality data from randomized trials to help guide our recommendations concerning the management of dense breasts identified on mammography. Yet many states have laws that suggest patients ask you to provide advice about breast density.

Patients, clinicians, and health systems vary in their confidence in the clinical value of breast cancer screening programs. Consequently, there is no “right answer” to this vexing problem. The standard of care is to support a range of options tailored to the specific clinical characteristics and needs of each patient. 
 

 

Instant Poll
Many states mandate that patients receive letters from their mammography center that report on breast density. In many states the law requires that the letter contain a statement that dense breasts increase the risk of breast cancer and reduce the ability of mammography to detect breast cancer. Do you believe these letters:

 

a) cause significant harm by raising patient anxiety and increasing the use of unnecessary tests
b) are beneficial because they provide the patient important information
c) both a and b

To weigh in and send your Letter to the Editor, visit obgmanagement.com and look for the “Quick Poll” on the right side of the home page.

References

 

1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.

2. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):168–175.

3. Gartlehner G, Thaler K, Chapman A, et al. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD009632.

4. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs. mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299(18):2151–2163.

5. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk calculator. BCSC Web site. https://tools.bcsc-scc.org/BC5yearRisk/intro.htm. Updated February 13, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

6. NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model). National Cancer Institute Web site. http://www.cancer.gov/BCRISKTOOL/. Accessed July 17, 2015.

7. IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool. http://www.ems-trials.org/riskevaluator/. Updated January 9, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

8. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(10):673–681.

9. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee Opinion No. 625: Management of women with dense breasts diagnosed by mammography. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3): 750–751.

10. Visvanathan K, Hurley P, Bantug E, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(34):2942–2962.

11. Profato JL, Arun BK. Genetic risk assessment for breast and gynecological malignancies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;27(1):1–5.

12. BRCAPRO. BayesMendel Lab. Harvard University Web site. http://bcb.dfci.harvard.edu/bayesmendel/brcapro.php. Accessed July 19, 2015.

References

 

1. Sprague BL, Stout KN, Schechter MD, et al. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):157–166.

2. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):168–175.

3. Gartlehner G, Thaler K, Chapman A, et al. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD009632.

4. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs. mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299(18):2151–2163.

5. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk calculator. BCSC Web site. https://tools.bcsc-scc.org/BC5yearRisk/intro.htm. Updated February 13, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

6. NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model). National Cancer Institute Web site. http://www.cancer.gov/BCRISKTOOL/. Accessed July 17, 2015.

7. IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool. http://www.ems-trials.org/riskevaluator/. Updated January 9, 2015. Accessed July 17, 2015.

8. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(10):673–681.

9. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee Opinion No. 625: Management of women with dense breasts diagnosed by mammography. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3): 750–751.

10. Visvanathan K, Hurley P, Bantug E, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(34):2942–2962.

11. Profato JL, Arun BK. Genetic risk assessment for breast and gynecological malignancies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;27(1):1–5.

12. BRCAPRO. BayesMendel Lab. Harvard University Web site. http://bcb.dfci.harvard.edu/bayesmendel/brcapro.php. Accessed July 19, 2015.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
7–11
Page Number
7–11
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Why is breast density a weighty matter?
Display Headline
Why is breast density a weighty matter?
Legacy Keywords
Robert L. Barbieri MD, dense breasts, breast density, mammogram, screening mammography, breast density classification, extremely dense breasts, almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense breasts, increased risk of breast cancer, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium calculator, BCSC, nondense breasts, supplemental ultrasound, ultrasonography, tomosynthesis, digital mammography, ACOG, American College of Radiology, false-positive test results, 3-D mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, breast biopsy, reproductive factors, early age at menarche, late childbearing, National Cancer Institute, NCI, Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool Gail model, BRCAT, IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool, Tyrer-Cuzick model,
Legacy Keywords
Robert L. Barbieri MD, dense breasts, breast density, mammogram, screening mammography, breast density classification, extremely dense breasts, almost entirely fatty, scattered fibroglandular densities, heterogeneously dense breasts, increased risk of breast cancer, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium calculator, BCSC, nondense breasts, supplemental ultrasound, ultrasonography, tomosynthesis, digital mammography, ACOG, American College of Radiology, false-positive test results, 3-D mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, breast biopsy, reproductive factors, early age at menarche, late childbearing, National Cancer Institute, NCI, Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool Gail model, BRCAT, IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool, Tyrer-Cuzick model,
Sections
Article PDF Media

2015 Update on contraception

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
2015 Update on contraception

Unintended pregnancy remains a serious problem in the United States, and the rate continues to increase. Currently, the unintended pregnancy rate is at an all-time high, estimated at 51% of all pregnancies.1 Sobering statistics reveal that the United States has a significantly higher rate of unintended pregnancy than any other developed country.2,3

So the question remains: If we have been introducing new contraceptive methods, why do unintended pregnancy rates keep rising in the United States?

The answer: Key barriers prevent women from attaining their desired contraceptive—foremost among them, cost.

The unintended pregnancy rate is highest among women who are poor, young (aged 18–24 years), minorities, or cohabitating.1 The unintended pregnancy rate among poor women (income below the federal poverty level) of reproductive age has increased over the past few decades, whereas the rate among high-income women (more than twice the federal poverty level) has declined.1 The unintended pregnancy rate discrepancy between poor women and those with means has increased 77%, from a threefold difference in 1995 to a difference of more than fivefold in 2008 (TABLE 1).1,4

These data indicate that we are doing well providing contraception to women of means. However, as a society, we need to improve how we deliver contraceptives—especially highly effective methods—to poor women. As one might expect, given these numbers, low-income women have rates of abortion and unplanned birth that are nearly 6 times higher than their higher-income counterparts.1 The resultant cost to society is substantial, with 68% of unplanned births paid for by public insurance programs such as Medicaid, compared with 38% of planned births.5

As women’s health providers, we must work to improve these numbers and advocate for our patients to help them gain access to the contraceptives they need in accordance with their reproductive life plan. In this article, we hope to put this information in context as we:

 

  • review reports and studies that evaluatethe trend of unintended pregnancy
  • describe one state initiative that reduced the rates of unintended pregnancy, birth, and abortion
  • introduce a new, highly effective levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Liletta) being marketed with the goal of reaching women who receive care from private physicians as well as public health clinics.

National and state snapshots reveal shifting proportions of intended, unintended pregnancies
Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.

Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.

Recent studies have demonstrated trends in unplanned pregnancy over the past 2 decades on both a national and statewide level. Data from the National Survey of Family Growth have highlighted trends in abortion and miscarriage, and data from the National Center for Health Statistics have shed light on birth trends. Of 6 million births in 2008, 51% were unintended.1 Unintended pregnancy was defined as a gestation that was mistimed or unwanted. Intended pregnancy was defined as one that was desired at the time it occurred or sooner.

2008 data focus on the national level
Although the overall pregnancy rate for US women aged 15 to 44 years is relatively unchanged, there is a small change in whether or not the pregnancy was intended. For 2008, as the rate of intended pregnancy dropped slightly, from 54 to 51 pregnancies per 1,000 women, the unintended pregnancy rate increased by 10%, from 49 to 54 pregnancies per 1,000 women. Proportionally, unintended pregnancies that resulted in abortion declined from 47% to 40%, whereas the rate of unintended pregnancies ending in birth increased to 27 births per 1,000 women.1

2010 data focus on individual states
We now have state-specific data on trends in unintended pregnancy rates from 2002 to 2010 in the United States.6 In 28 of 50 states, more than half of all pregnancies were unintended, with rates ranging from 36% to 62%. The median rate was 47 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, with the lowest unintended pregnancy rate in New Hampshire at 32 per 1,000 women and highest rates in Delaware, Hawaii, and New York at 61 to 62 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women.6

Between 2002 and 2010, unintended pregnancy rates fell 5% or more in 18 states and rose 5% or more in 4 states. In the remaining 12 states for which there are data, unintended pregnancy rates remained unchanged.

Interestingly, 16 states had increases in unintended pregnancy rates of 5% or more between 2002 and 2006. The trend reversed between 2006 and 2010, during which 28 of 41 states with available data experienced decreases of 5% or more and only 1 state experienced an increase of 5% or more. These latest numbers suggest we may be making some progress in reducing the overall rate of unintended pregnancy.

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Although the rate of unintended pregnancy is declining in some states, the national rate is still increasing. This information emphasizes the need for all providers to consider initiating discussions about pregnancy intentions—a step that may be as important as obtaining blood pressure and weight. When women are seen for any health visit, they should be asked about their reproductive plans. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a helpful set of questions to guide the discussion of timing and planning pregnancy. It also provides useful information on ways to increase utilization of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) to help realize the goal of fewer unintended pregnancies. (For more on this discussion, see “How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan,” below.)


 

 

How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) offers a tool for health care professionals to use to encourage patients to think about their reproductive goals and make a plan to facilitate those goals. It’s available at: http://www.cdc.gov/preconception/documents/rlphealthproviders.pdf.

Questions to ask your patient

 

  • Do you plan to have any (more) children at any time in your future?

IF YES

 

  • How many children would you like to have?
  • How long would you like to wait until you or your partner become pregnant?
  • What family planning method do you plan to use until you or your partner are ready to become pregnant?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?

IF NO

 

  • What family planning method will you use to avoid pregnancy?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?
  • People’s plans change. Is it possible that you or your partner could ever decide to become pregnant?

Action plan
Encourage your patient to make a plan and take action. Remind her that the plan doesn’t have to be set in stone.


How Colorado broke down barriers to highly effective contraception—and saved $42.5 million in 1 year
Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.

The Contraceptive CHOICE Project in St. Louis County, Missouri, is an incredible success story. In it, clinicians made highly effective LARCs readily available and free of charge. When a large percentage of women chose a LARC method, the unintended pregnancy and abortion rates declined.7 In Colorado, providers put this study into practice, creating a successful statewide initiative to reduce the unintended pregnancy rate.8

The data behind LARC methods
LARC methods are backed by endorsements from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the CDC, and the World Health Organization, which recommend them for adolescents because of their superiority to shorter-acting methods. With LARCs, failure rates are lower and compliance is greater, making them ideal for adolescents, who have high unintended pregnancy rates.1

However, based on 2011 data, only 2% of LARC users nationwide are aged 20 or younger. A number of barriers prevent young women from obtaining LARCs, including lack of education, limited access to and availability of the contraceptives, and, importantly, cost. Many state plans have adopted ­Medicaid expansions to reduce barriers to LARCs. However, this benefit is still not available in many states, Colorado being 1 of them.

How the Colorado initiative worked
In 2005, 40% of Colorado’s births were ­unintended, and 60% of those unintended births occurred in women aged 15 to 24 years. About three-quarters of women who were using a contraceptive method at the time of unintended pregnancy reported that it was a low-cost, high-failure method such as condoms or withdrawal.

In response, Colorado’s Department of Public Health and Environment and the ­Colorado Family Planning Initiative (CFPI) used private funds from an anonymous foundation to provide LARC products at no cost to the Title X–funded clinics in the state.

The initiative began in 2009 in clinics that served 95% of the state’s total population. The funding provided the products ­themselves (intrauterine device [IUD], implant), as well as training for providers and staff.

Before the initiative began, 52,645 clients received services in these clinics annually. In the third year of the initiative, that number had increased to 64,928 annually. About 55% of clients receiving services both preinitiative and postinitiative were younger than 25 years, and most (92% in 2011) had income below the poverty level.

LARC use increased fourfold over the 3 years of the funded program, from less than 4.5% to 19.4% in the third year. Contraceptive implant use increased tenfold, and IUD use increased by almost threefold. At the same time, oral contraceptive use declined 13%. Before the initiative, only 620 young, low-income women used a LARC method; afterward, 8,435 did.

These changes in contraceptive practice triggered a significant decline in pregnancy rates (TABLE 2) and abortion rates (TABLE 3). Abortion rates increased 8% among 20- to 24-year-olds who were not enrolled in the initiative and decreased 18% among those who were. The proportion of high-risk births (births to unmarried, low-income women with less than a high school education) dropped 24% after the initiative began. The proportion of high-risk births in counties not receiving CFPI funds stayed the same at 7%.


Colorado program saved $42.5 million in public funds
This Colorado program demonstrated that the CHOICE Project can be translated to a statewide initiative. Whereas CHOICE enrolled 9,256 women over 4 years, the Colorado initiative included more than 50,000 clients annually over 3 years. Colorado did not use any state funds for this project, which resulted in significant decreases in the unintended birth rate, abortion rate, and rate of high-risk births.

The Colorado governor’s office estimates that the CFPI saved $5.68 in Medicaid costs for Colorado for every dollar spent on contraceptives. In just 1 year (2010), the program saved approximately $42.5 million in public funds.

Ironically, despite the success of this project, the Colorado legislature denied further funding once the initial financial support ceased.
 

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
The Colorado program demonstrates that we all can provide LARC methods in practice, especially to young women. In this population, use of highly effective contraception resulted in fewer unintended pregnancies, births, and abortions statewide.

We also need to advocate for our patients, particularly those who have less means and rely on public assistance. Public funding of LARC methods clearly improves outcomes at an individual and population level.

 

 

A new, more affordable IUD enters the market
Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.

Programs such as the Contraceptive CHOICE Project and the Colorado Family Planning Initiative relied on private foundations for financial support, largely because of the high cost of the IUDs and implants currently available in the United States. Even with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) reducing the costs of LARC products and other contraceptives for patients, there are still many women not covered by these programs. For example, “grandfathered” health insurance plans do not need to follow some aspects of the ACA.

Just as important, the high cost of LARC products takes a toll on providers and clinics that must finance the cost per unit to have stock on hand and then wait for months for reimbursement by insurance companies. As a result, some providers do not stock IUDs and implants and only order them as they are needed and approved by insurance for a particular patient. These barriers limit access to LARC methods and reduce the number of women who receive the products.8

Liletta is less expensive than other IUDs
Enter Liletta, a new levonorgestrel-releasing, 52-mg intrauterine system (IUS) that has been in clinical trials since 2009.9 ACCESS IUS (A Comprehensive Contraceptive Efficacy and Safety Study of an Intrauterine System) was initiated by Medicines360, a unique nonprofit pharmaceutical company committed to ensuring access to reproductive health products for all women (private and public sector).

ACCESS IUS is the largest IUD approval study ever performed exclusively in the United States. The Phase 3, open-label clinical trial was conducted at 29 sites around the United States, enrolling healthy, nonpregnant, sexually active women aged 16 to 45 years with regular menstrual cycles. Both nulliparous and parous women were included, with no weight or body mass index (BMI) restrictions applied. The study is ongoing and will continue for as long as 7 years. Eisenberg and colleagues published the data used for initial approval for 3 years of use in the United States and Europe.9

Details of the trial
A total of 1,600 women aged 16 to 35 years comprised the group in which efficacy was evaluated. An additional 151 women aged 36 to 45 years were evaluated for safety only. Of the enrolled women, 1,011 (58%) were nulliparous, making ACCESS IUS the largest product approval study of nulliparous women. In addition, 438 women (25.1%) were obese, and 5% of these women had a BMI greater than 40 kg/m2.

Liletta was placed successfully in 1,714 women (97.9%). Fifteen women did not have placement attempted due to uterine factors (the uterus could not be sounded, or the sound was <5.5 cm) or factors unrelated to the product or inserter. In women in whom placement was attempted, the success rate was 98.7%.

The first-year Pearl index for Liletta was 0.15. Life-table pregnancy rates were 0.14 through year 1 and 0.55 through year 3. Four of the 6 pregnancies reported through 3 years of use were ectopic. Adverse events and their incidence, occurring in more than 2% of users, were acne (6%), expulsion (3.5%), dyspareunia (2.8%), and mastalgia (2.0%). The most common adverse events leading to discontinuation were expulsion (3.5%), bleeding complaints (1.5%), acne (1.3%), and mood swings (1.3%).

Uterine perforation with Liletta was diagnosed in 2 participants (0.11%). Expulsion occurred in 62 users (3.5%) and was more frequent among parous than nulliparous women (5.6% vs 2.0%, respectively; P<.001). Most (80.6%) of the expulsions were reported in the first year of product use. Pelvic infection was reported in 10 participants (0.6%), and all cases resolved with outpatient antibiotic treatment.9

Keep in mind that this is an ongoing study—not all women have reached a full 3 years of use. Updates on efficacy and adverse events will be published in the future. This current publication demonstrates the high efficacy and safety of the product through 3 years of use, permitting its approval for contraception in the United States.

In Europe, the product is approved for both contraception and the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding, based on a European study.10

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Liletta is a branded product (not generic) designed to be similar to Mirena, with the same size, frame, hormone content, and hormone release rate.11 Medicines360 has entered a groundbreaking marketing partnership with Actavis to make Liletta widely available and affordable. For most public sector providers and clinics in the United States, Liletta costs only $50, significantly less than other LARC methods available in the United States. Actavis also has a program that ensures that any woman lacking insurance coverage for an IUD and not receiving care at a public sector clinic will not be charged more than $75 for her IUD. However, the price of the device is only one aspect of its overall cost, as women still need to pay for any office visit or insertion fees.

For society, this unique business partnership has to include providers and patients as well. Sales of Liletta in the private sector will support the very low price in the public sector. As a health care community, even if we do not directly care for women in public-sector settings, we can all help poor women access very affordable highly effective contraception.

For providers, Liletta is a lower-cost alternative to currently available hormonal IUDs and should perform well over the long term. The highly successful use of Liletta in nulliparous women demonstrates its safety in this population. The 3-year approval is the first step, as the Phase 3 study continues. In the future, Liletta is expected to be approved for 5 years or longer.

 

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.
2. Guttmacher Institute. Fact Sheet: Unintended Pregnancy in the United States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
3. Singh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241–250.
4. Henshaw SK. Unintended pregnancy in the United States. Fam Plann Perspectives. 1998;30(1):24–29, 46.
5. Sonfield A, Kost K. Public costs from unintended pregnancies and the role of public insurance programs in paying for pregnancy-related care. National and States Estimates for 2010. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/public-costs-of-UP-2010.pdf. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
6. Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 30, 2015.
7. Birgisson NE, Zhao Q, Secura GM, Madden T, Peipert JF. Preventing unintended pregnancy: the ContraceptiveCHOICE Project in review. J Womens Health. 2015; 24(5):349–353.
8. Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.
9. Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.
10. Mawet M, Nollevaux F, Nizet D, et al. Impact of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system, Levosert, on heavy menstrual bleeding: results of a one-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2014;19(3):169–179.
11. Gopalakrishnan M, Liu T, Gobburu J, Creinin MD. Levonorgestrel release rates with LNG20, a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(suppl 1): 62S–63S.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

 

Jennifer K. Hsia, MD, MPH
Dr. Hsia is a Family Planning Fellow in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Mitchell D. Creinin, MD
Dr. Creinin is Professor and Director of Family Planning in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Dr. Creinin reports that he is a consultant for Actavis, Bayer, Merck, Teva, and Polkadoc. The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, receives research funding from Merck and Medicines360. Dr. Hsia reports that she has no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
32–38
Legacy Keywords
Jennifer K. Hsia MD MPH, Mitchell D. Creinin MD, update on contraception, contraception, unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, poor women, income below the federal poverty level of reproductive age, contraceptives, abortion rates, rates unplanned births, Medicaid, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, IUS, Liletta, Medicines 360, Actavis, long-acting reversible contraceptives, LARCs, IUDs, intrauterine device, Contraceptive CHOICE Project, ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, CDC, World Health Organization, WHO, Colorado Family Planning Initiative, pregnancy rates, reproductive life plan, ACCESS IUS
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

 

Jennifer K. Hsia, MD, MPH
Dr. Hsia is a Family Planning Fellow in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Mitchell D. Creinin, MD
Dr. Creinin is Professor and Director of Family Planning in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Dr. Creinin reports that he is a consultant for Actavis, Bayer, Merck, Teva, and Polkadoc. The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, receives research funding from Merck and Medicines360. Dr. Hsia reports that she has no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

 

Jennifer K. Hsia, MD, MPH
Dr. Hsia is a Family Planning Fellow in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Mitchell D. Creinin, MD
Dr. Creinin is Professor and Director of Family Planning in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, in Sacramento, California.

Dr. Creinin reports that he is a consultant for Actavis, Bayer, Merck, Teva, and Polkadoc. The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of California, Davis, receives research funding from Merck and Medicines360. Dr. Hsia reports that she has no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Unintended pregnancy remains a serious problem in the United States, and the rate continues to increase. Currently, the unintended pregnancy rate is at an all-time high, estimated at 51% of all pregnancies.1 Sobering statistics reveal that the United States has a significantly higher rate of unintended pregnancy than any other developed country.2,3

So the question remains: If we have been introducing new contraceptive methods, why do unintended pregnancy rates keep rising in the United States?

The answer: Key barriers prevent women from attaining their desired contraceptive—foremost among them, cost.

The unintended pregnancy rate is highest among women who are poor, young (aged 18–24 years), minorities, or cohabitating.1 The unintended pregnancy rate among poor women (income below the federal poverty level) of reproductive age has increased over the past few decades, whereas the rate among high-income women (more than twice the federal poverty level) has declined.1 The unintended pregnancy rate discrepancy between poor women and those with means has increased 77%, from a threefold difference in 1995 to a difference of more than fivefold in 2008 (TABLE 1).1,4

These data indicate that we are doing well providing contraception to women of means. However, as a society, we need to improve how we deliver contraceptives—especially highly effective methods—to poor women. As one might expect, given these numbers, low-income women have rates of abortion and unplanned birth that are nearly 6 times higher than their higher-income counterparts.1 The resultant cost to society is substantial, with 68% of unplanned births paid for by public insurance programs such as Medicaid, compared with 38% of planned births.5

As women’s health providers, we must work to improve these numbers and advocate for our patients to help them gain access to the contraceptives they need in accordance with their reproductive life plan. In this article, we hope to put this information in context as we:

 

  • review reports and studies that evaluatethe trend of unintended pregnancy
  • describe one state initiative that reduced the rates of unintended pregnancy, birth, and abortion
  • introduce a new, highly effective levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Liletta) being marketed with the goal of reaching women who receive care from private physicians as well as public health clinics.

National and state snapshots reveal shifting proportions of intended, unintended pregnancies
Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.

Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.

Recent studies have demonstrated trends in unplanned pregnancy over the past 2 decades on both a national and statewide level. Data from the National Survey of Family Growth have highlighted trends in abortion and miscarriage, and data from the National Center for Health Statistics have shed light on birth trends. Of 6 million births in 2008, 51% were unintended.1 Unintended pregnancy was defined as a gestation that was mistimed or unwanted. Intended pregnancy was defined as one that was desired at the time it occurred or sooner.

2008 data focus on the national level
Although the overall pregnancy rate for US women aged 15 to 44 years is relatively unchanged, there is a small change in whether or not the pregnancy was intended. For 2008, as the rate of intended pregnancy dropped slightly, from 54 to 51 pregnancies per 1,000 women, the unintended pregnancy rate increased by 10%, from 49 to 54 pregnancies per 1,000 women. Proportionally, unintended pregnancies that resulted in abortion declined from 47% to 40%, whereas the rate of unintended pregnancies ending in birth increased to 27 births per 1,000 women.1

2010 data focus on individual states
We now have state-specific data on trends in unintended pregnancy rates from 2002 to 2010 in the United States.6 In 28 of 50 states, more than half of all pregnancies were unintended, with rates ranging from 36% to 62%. The median rate was 47 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, with the lowest unintended pregnancy rate in New Hampshire at 32 per 1,000 women and highest rates in Delaware, Hawaii, and New York at 61 to 62 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women.6

Between 2002 and 2010, unintended pregnancy rates fell 5% or more in 18 states and rose 5% or more in 4 states. In the remaining 12 states for which there are data, unintended pregnancy rates remained unchanged.

Interestingly, 16 states had increases in unintended pregnancy rates of 5% or more between 2002 and 2006. The trend reversed between 2006 and 2010, during which 28 of 41 states with available data experienced decreases of 5% or more and only 1 state experienced an increase of 5% or more. These latest numbers suggest we may be making some progress in reducing the overall rate of unintended pregnancy.

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Although the rate of unintended pregnancy is declining in some states, the national rate is still increasing. This information emphasizes the need for all providers to consider initiating discussions about pregnancy intentions—a step that may be as important as obtaining blood pressure and weight. When women are seen for any health visit, they should be asked about their reproductive plans. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a helpful set of questions to guide the discussion of timing and planning pregnancy. It also provides useful information on ways to increase utilization of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) to help realize the goal of fewer unintended pregnancies. (For more on this discussion, see “How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan,” below.)


 

 

How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) offers a tool for health care professionals to use to encourage patients to think about their reproductive goals and make a plan to facilitate those goals. It’s available at: http://www.cdc.gov/preconception/documents/rlphealthproviders.pdf.

Questions to ask your patient

 

  • Do you plan to have any (more) children at any time in your future?

IF YES

 

  • How many children would you like to have?
  • How long would you like to wait until you or your partner become pregnant?
  • What family planning method do you plan to use until you or your partner are ready to become pregnant?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?

IF NO

 

  • What family planning method will you use to avoid pregnancy?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?
  • People’s plans change. Is it possible that you or your partner could ever decide to become pregnant?

Action plan
Encourage your patient to make a plan and take action. Remind her that the plan doesn’t have to be set in stone.


How Colorado broke down barriers to highly effective contraception—and saved $42.5 million in 1 year
Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.

The Contraceptive CHOICE Project in St. Louis County, Missouri, is an incredible success story. In it, clinicians made highly effective LARCs readily available and free of charge. When a large percentage of women chose a LARC method, the unintended pregnancy and abortion rates declined.7 In Colorado, providers put this study into practice, creating a successful statewide initiative to reduce the unintended pregnancy rate.8

The data behind LARC methods
LARC methods are backed by endorsements from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the CDC, and the World Health Organization, which recommend them for adolescents because of their superiority to shorter-acting methods. With LARCs, failure rates are lower and compliance is greater, making them ideal for adolescents, who have high unintended pregnancy rates.1

However, based on 2011 data, only 2% of LARC users nationwide are aged 20 or younger. A number of barriers prevent young women from obtaining LARCs, including lack of education, limited access to and availability of the contraceptives, and, importantly, cost. Many state plans have adopted ­Medicaid expansions to reduce barriers to LARCs. However, this benefit is still not available in many states, Colorado being 1 of them.

How the Colorado initiative worked
In 2005, 40% of Colorado’s births were ­unintended, and 60% of those unintended births occurred in women aged 15 to 24 years. About three-quarters of women who were using a contraceptive method at the time of unintended pregnancy reported that it was a low-cost, high-failure method such as condoms or withdrawal.

In response, Colorado’s Department of Public Health and Environment and the ­Colorado Family Planning Initiative (CFPI) used private funds from an anonymous foundation to provide LARC products at no cost to the Title X–funded clinics in the state.

The initiative began in 2009 in clinics that served 95% of the state’s total population. The funding provided the products ­themselves (intrauterine device [IUD], implant), as well as training for providers and staff.

Before the initiative began, 52,645 clients received services in these clinics annually. In the third year of the initiative, that number had increased to 64,928 annually. About 55% of clients receiving services both preinitiative and postinitiative were younger than 25 years, and most (92% in 2011) had income below the poverty level.

LARC use increased fourfold over the 3 years of the funded program, from less than 4.5% to 19.4% in the third year. Contraceptive implant use increased tenfold, and IUD use increased by almost threefold. At the same time, oral contraceptive use declined 13%. Before the initiative, only 620 young, low-income women used a LARC method; afterward, 8,435 did.

These changes in contraceptive practice triggered a significant decline in pregnancy rates (TABLE 2) and abortion rates (TABLE 3). Abortion rates increased 8% among 20- to 24-year-olds who were not enrolled in the initiative and decreased 18% among those who were. The proportion of high-risk births (births to unmarried, low-income women with less than a high school education) dropped 24% after the initiative began. The proportion of high-risk births in counties not receiving CFPI funds stayed the same at 7%.


Colorado program saved $42.5 million in public funds
This Colorado program demonstrated that the CHOICE Project can be translated to a statewide initiative. Whereas CHOICE enrolled 9,256 women over 4 years, the Colorado initiative included more than 50,000 clients annually over 3 years. Colorado did not use any state funds for this project, which resulted in significant decreases in the unintended birth rate, abortion rate, and rate of high-risk births.

The Colorado governor’s office estimates that the CFPI saved $5.68 in Medicaid costs for Colorado for every dollar spent on contraceptives. In just 1 year (2010), the program saved approximately $42.5 million in public funds.

Ironically, despite the success of this project, the Colorado legislature denied further funding once the initial financial support ceased.
 

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
The Colorado program demonstrates that we all can provide LARC methods in practice, especially to young women. In this population, use of highly effective contraception resulted in fewer unintended pregnancies, births, and abortions statewide.

We also need to advocate for our patients, particularly those who have less means and rely on public assistance. Public funding of LARC methods clearly improves outcomes at an individual and population level.

 

 

A new, more affordable IUD enters the market
Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.

Programs such as the Contraceptive CHOICE Project and the Colorado Family Planning Initiative relied on private foundations for financial support, largely because of the high cost of the IUDs and implants currently available in the United States. Even with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) reducing the costs of LARC products and other contraceptives for patients, there are still many women not covered by these programs. For example, “grandfathered” health insurance plans do not need to follow some aspects of the ACA.

Just as important, the high cost of LARC products takes a toll on providers and clinics that must finance the cost per unit to have stock on hand and then wait for months for reimbursement by insurance companies. As a result, some providers do not stock IUDs and implants and only order them as they are needed and approved by insurance for a particular patient. These barriers limit access to LARC methods and reduce the number of women who receive the products.8

Liletta is less expensive than other IUDs
Enter Liletta, a new levonorgestrel-releasing, 52-mg intrauterine system (IUS) that has been in clinical trials since 2009.9 ACCESS IUS (A Comprehensive Contraceptive Efficacy and Safety Study of an Intrauterine System) was initiated by Medicines360, a unique nonprofit pharmaceutical company committed to ensuring access to reproductive health products for all women (private and public sector).

ACCESS IUS is the largest IUD approval study ever performed exclusively in the United States. The Phase 3, open-label clinical trial was conducted at 29 sites around the United States, enrolling healthy, nonpregnant, sexually active women aged 16 to 45 years with regular menstrual cycles. Both nulliparous and parous women were included, with no weight or body mass index (BMI) restrictions applied. The study is ongoing and will continue for as long as 7 years. Eisenberg and colleagues published the data used for initial approval for 3 years of use in the United States and Europe.9

Details of the trial
A total of 1,600 women aged 16 to 35 years comprised the group in which efficacy was evaluated. An additional 151 women aged 36 to 45 years were evaluated for safety only. Of the enrolled women, 1,011 (58%) were nulliparous, making ACCESS IUS the largest product approval study of nulliparous women. In addition, 438 women (25.1%) were obese, and 5% of these women had a BMI greater than 40 kg/m2.

Liletta was placed successfully in 1,714 women (97.9%). Fifteen women did not have placement attempted due to uterine factors (the uterus could not be sounded, or the sound was <5.5 cm) or factors unrelated to the product or inserter. In women in whom placement was attempted, the success rate was 98.7%.

The first-year Pearl index for Liletta was 0.15. Life-table pregnancy rates were 0.14 through year 1 and 0.55 through year 3. Four of the 6 pregnancies reported through 3 years of use were ectopic. Adverse events and their incidence, occurring in more than 2% of users, were acne (6%), expulsion (3.5%), dyspareunia (2.8%), and mastalgia (2.0%). The most common adverse events leading to discontinuation were expulsion (3.5%), bleeding complaints (1.5%), acne (1.3%), and mood swings (1.3%).

Uterine perforation with Liletta was diagnosed in 2 participants (0.11%). Expulsion occurred in 62 users (3.5%) and was more frequent among parous than nulliparous women (5.6% vs 2.0%, respectively; P<.001). Most (80.6%) of the expulsions were reported in the first year of product use. Pelvic infection was reported in 10 participants (0.6%), and all cases resolved with outpatient antibiotic treatment.9

Keep in mind that this is an ongoing study—not all women have reached a full 3 years of use. Updates on efficacy and adverse events will be published in the future. This current publication demonstrates the high efficacy and safety of the product through 3 years of use, permitting its approval for contraception in the United States.

In Europe, the product is approved for both contraception and the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding, based on a European study.10

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Liletta is a branded product (not generic) designed to be similar to Mirena, with the same size, frame, hormone content, and hormone release rate.11 Medicines360 has entered a groundbreaking marketing partnership with Actavis to make Liletta widely available and affordable. For most public sector providers and clinics in the United States, Liletta costs only $50, significantly less than other LARC methods available in the United States. Actavis also has a program that ensures that any woman lacking insurance coverage for an IUD and not receiving care at a public sector clinic will not be charged more than $75 for her IUD. However, the price of the device is only one aspect of its overall cost, as women still need to pay for any office visit or insertion fees.

For society, this unique business partnership has to include providers and patients as well. Sales of Liletta in the private sector will support the very low price in the public sector. As a health care community, even if we do not directly care for women in public-sector settings, we can all help poor women access very affordable highly effective contraception.

For providers, Liletta is a lower-cost alternative to currently available hormonal IUDs and should perform well over the long term. The highly successful use of Liletta in nulliparous women demonstrates its safety in this population. The 3-year approval is the first step, as the Phase 3 study continues. In the future, Liletta is expected to be approved for 5 years or longer.

 

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

Unintended pregnancy remains a serious problem in the United States, and the rate continues to increase. Currently, the unintended pregnancy rate is at an all-time high, estimated at 51% of all pregnancies.1 Sobering statistics reveal that the United States has a significantly higher rate of unintended pregnancy than any other developed country.2,3

So the question remains: If we have been introducing new contraceptive methods, why do unintended pregnancy rates keep rising in the United States?

The answer: Key barriers prevent women from attaining their desired contraceptive—foremost among them, cost.

The unintended pregnancy rate is highest among women who are poor, young (aged 18–24 years), minorities, or cohabitating.1 The unintended pregnancy rate among poor women (income below the federal poverty level) of reproductive age has increased over the past few decades, whereas the rate among high-income women (more than twice the federal poverty level) has declined.1 The unintended pregnancy rate discrepancy between poor women and those with means has increased 77%, from a threefold difference in 1995 to a difference of more than fivefold in 2008 (TABLE 1).1,4

These data indicate that we are doing well providing contraception to women of means. However, as a society, we need to improve how we deliver contraceptives—especially highly effective methods—to poor women. As one might expect, given these numbers, low-income women have rates of abortion and unplanned birth that are nearly 6 times higher than their higher-income counterparts.1 The resultant cost to society is substantial, with 68% of unplanned births paid for by public insurance programs such as Medicaid, compared with 38% of planned births.5

As women’s health providers, we must work to improve these numbers and advocate for our patients to help them gain access to the contraceptives they need in accordance with their reproductive life plan. In this article, we hope to put this information in context as we:

 

  • review reports and studies that evaluatethe trend of unintended pregnancy
  • describe one state initiative that reduced the rates of unintended pregnancy, birth, and abortion
  • introduce a new, highly effective levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Liletta) being marketed with the goal of reaching women who receive care from private physicians as well as public health clinics.

National and state snapshots reveal shifting proportions of intended, unintended pregnancies
Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.

Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.

Recent studies have demonstrated trends in unplanned pregnancy over the past 2 decades on both a national and statewide level. Data from the National Survey of Family Growth have highlighted trends in abortion and miscarriage, and data from the National Center for Health Statistics have shed light on birth trends. Of 6 million births in 2008, 51% were unintended.1 Unintended pregnancy was defined as a gestation that was mistimed or unwanted. Intended pregnancy was defined as one that was desired at the time it occurred or sooner.

2008 data focus on the national level
Although the overall pregnancy rate for US women aged 15 to 44 years is relatively unchanged, there is a small change in whether or not the pregnancy was intended. For 2008, as the rate of intended pregnancy dropped slightly, from 54 to 51 pregnancies per 1,000 women, the unintended pregnancy rate increased by 10%, from 49 to 54 pregnancies per 1,000 women. Proportionally, unintended pregnancies that resulted in abortion declined from 47% to 40%, whereas the rate of unintended pregnancies ending in birth increased to 27 births per 1,000 women.1

2010 data focus on individual states
We now have state-specific data on trends in unintended pregnancy rates from 2002 to 2010 in the United States.6 In 28 of 50 states, more than half of all pregnancies were unintended, with rates ranging from 36% to 62%. The median rate was 47 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, with the lowest unintended pregnancy rate in New Hampshire at 32 per 1,000 women and highest rates in Delaware, Hawaii, and New York at 61 to 62 unintended pregnancies per 1,000 women.6

Between 2002 and 2010, unintended pregnancy rates fell 5% or more in 18 states and rose 5% or more in 4 states. In the remaining 12 states for which there are data, unintended pregnancy rates remained unchanged.

Interestingly, 16 states had increases in unintended pregnancy rates of 5% or more between 2002 and 2006. The trend reversed between 2006 and 2010, during which 28 of 41 states with available data experienced decreases of 5% or more and only 1 state experienced an increase of 5% or more. These latest numbers suggest we may be making some progress in reducing the overall rate of unintended pregnancy.

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Although the rate of unintended pregnancy is declining in some states, the national rate is still increasing. This information emphasizes the need for all providers to consider initiating discussions about pregnancy intentions—a step that may be as important as obtaining blood pressure and weight. When women are seen for any health visit, they should be asked about their reproductive plans. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a helpful set of questions to guide the discussion of timing and planning pregnancy. It also provides useful information on ways to increase utilization of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) to help realize the goal of fewer unintended pregnancies. (For more on this discussion, see “How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan,” below.)


 

 

How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) offers a tool for health care professionals to use to encourage patients to think about their reproductive goals and make a plan to facilitate those goals. It’s available at: http://www.cdc.gov/preconception/documents/rlphealthproviders.pdf.

Questions to ask your patient

 

  • Do you plan to have any (more) children at any time in your future?

IF YES

 

  • How many children would you like to have?
  • How long would you like to wait until you or your partner become pregnant?
  • What family planning method do you plan to use until you or your partner are ready to become pregnant?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?

IF NO

 

  • What family planning method will you use to avoid pregnancy?
  • How sure are you that you will be able to use this method without any problems?
  • People’s plans change. Is it possible that you or your partner could ever decide to become pregnant?

Action plan
Encourage your patient to make a plan and take action. Remind her that the plan doesn’t have to be set in stone.


How Colorado broke down barriers to highly effective contraception—and saved $42.5 million in 1 year
Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.

The Contraceptive CHOICE Project in St. Louis County, Missouri, is an incredible success story. In it, clinicians made highly effective LARCs readily available and free of charge. When a large percentage of women chose a LARC method, the unintended pregnancy and abortion rates declined.7 In Colorado, providers put this study into practice, creating a successful statewide initiative to reduce the unintended pregnancy rate.8

The data behind LARC methods
LARC methods are backed by endorsements from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the CDC, and the World Health Organization, which recommend them for adolescents because of their superiority to shorter-acting methods. With LARCs, failure rates are lower and compliance is greater, making them ideal for adolescents, who have high unintended pregnancy rates.1

However, based on 2011 data, only 2% of LARC users nationwide are aged 20 or younger. A number of barriers prevent young women from obtaining LARCs, including lack of education, limited access to and availability of the contraceptives, and, importantly, cost. Many state plans have adopted ­Medicaid expansions to reduce barriers to LARCs. However, this benefit is still not available in many states, Colorado being 1 of them.

How the Colorado initiative worked
In 2005, 40% of Colorado’s births were ­unintended, and 60% of those unintended births occurred in women aged 15 to 24 years. About three-quarters of women who were using a contraceptive method at the time of unintended pregnancy reported that it was a low-cost, high-failure method such as condoms or withdrawal.

In response, Colorado’s Department of Public Health and Environment and the ­Colorado Family Planning Initiative (CFPI) used private funds from an anonymous foundation to provide LARC products at no cost to the Title X–funded clinics in the state.

The initiative began in 2009 in clinics that served 95% of the state’s total population. The funding provided the products ­themselves (intrauterine device [IUD], implant), as well as training for providers and staff.

Before the initiative began, 52,645 clients received services in these clinics annually. In the third year of the initiative, that number had increased to 64,928 annually. About 55% of clients receiving services both preinitiative and postinitiative were younger than 25 years, and most (92% in 2011) had income below the poverty level.

LARC use increased fourfold over the 3 years of the funded program, from less than 4.5% to 19.4% in the third year. Contraceptive implant use increased tenfold, and IUD use increased by almost threefold. At the same time, oral contraceptive use declined 13%. Before the initiative, only 620 young, low-income women used a LARC method; afterward, 8,435 did.

These changes in contraceptive practice triggered a significant decline in pregnancy rates (TABLE 2) and abortion rates (TABLE 3). Abortion rates increased 8% among 20- to 24-year-olds who were not enrolled in the initiative and decreased 18% among those who were. The proportion of high-risk births (births to unmarried, low-income women with less than a high school education) dropped 24% after the initiative began. The proportion of high-risk births in counties not receiving CFPI funds stayed the same at 7%.


Colorado program saved $42.5 million in public funds
This Colorado program demonstrated that the CHOICE Project can be translated to a statewide initiative. Whereas CHOICE enrolled 9,256 women over 4 years, the Colorado initiative included more than 50,000 clients annually over 3 years. Colorado did not use any state funds for this project, which resulted in significant decreases in the unintended birth rate, abortion rate, and rate of high-risk births.

The Colorado governor’s office estimates that the CFPI saved $5.68 in Medicaid costs for Colorado for every dollar spent on contraceptives. In just 1 year (2010), the program saved approximately $42.5 million in public funds.

Ironically, despite the success of this project, the Colorado legislature denied further funding once the initial financial support ceased.
 

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
The Colorado program demonstrates that we all can provide LARC methods in practice, especially to young women. In this population, use of highly effective contraception resulted in fewer unintended pregnancies, births, and abortions statewide.

We also need to advocate for our patients, particularly those who have less means and rely on public assistance. Public funding of LARC methods clearly improves outcomes at an individual and population level.

 

 

A new, more affordable IUD enters the market
Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.

Programs such as the Contraceptive CHOICE Project and the Colorado Family Planning Initiative relied on private foundations for financial support, largely because of the high cost of the IUDs and implants currently available in the United States. Even with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) reducing the costs of LARC products and other contraceptives for patients, there are still many women not covered by these programs. For example, “grandfathered” health insurance plans do not need to follow some aspects of the ACA.

Just as important, the high cost of LARC products takes a toll on providers and clinics that must finance the cost per unit to have stock on hand and then wait for months for reimbursement by insurance companies. As a result, some providers do not stock IUDs and implants and only order them as they are needed and approved by insurance for a particular patient. These barriers limit access to LARC methods and reduce the number of women who receive the products.8

Liletta is less expensive than other IUDs
Enter Liletta, a new levonorgestrel-releasing, 52-mg intrauterine system (IUS) that has been in clinical trials since 2009.9 ACCESS IUS (A Comprehensive Contraceptive Efficacy and Safety Study of an Intrauterine System) was initiated by Medicines360, a unique nonprofit pharmaceutical company committed to ensuring access to reproductive health products for all women (private and public sector).

ACCESS IUS is the largest IUD approval study ever performed exclusively in the United States. The Phase 3, open-label clinical trial was conducted at 29 sites around the United States, enrolling healthy, nonpregnant, sexually active women aged 16 to 45 years with regular menstrual cycles. Both nulliparous and parous women were included, with no weight or body mass index (BMI) restrictions applied. The study is ongoing and will continue for as long as 7 years. Eisenberg and colleagues published the data used for initial approval for 3 years of use in the United States and Europe.9

Details of the trial
A total of 1,600 women aged 16 to 35 years comprised the group in which efficacy was evaluated. An additional 151 women aged 36 to 45 years were evaluated for safety only. Of the enrolled women, 1,011 (58%) were nulliparous, making ACCESS IUS the largest product approval study of nulliparous women. In addition, 438 women (25.1%) were obese, and 5% of these women had a BMI greater than 40 kg/m2.

Liletta was placed successfully in 1,714 women (97.9%). Fifteen women did not have placement attempted due to uterine factors (the uterus could not be sounded, or the sound was <5.5 cm) or factors unrelated to the product or inserter. In women in whom placement was attempted, the success rate was 98.7%.

The first-year Pearl index for Liletta was 0.15. Life-table pregnancy rates were 0.14 through year 1 and 0.55 through year 3. Four of the 6 pregnancies reported through 3 years of use were ectopic. Adverse events and their incidence, occurring in more than 2% of users, were acne (6%), expulsion (3.5%), dyspareunia (2.8%), and mastalgia (2.0%). The most common adverse events leading to discontinuation were expulsion (3.5%), bleeding complaints (1.5%), acne (1.3%), and mood swings (1.3%).

Uterine perforation with Liletta was diagnosed in 2 participants (0.11%). Expulsion occurred in 62 users (3.5%) and was more frequent among parous than nulliparous women (5.6% vs 2.0%, respectively; P<.001). Most (80.6%) of the expulsions were reported in the first year of product use. Pelvic infection was reported in 10 participants (0.6%), and all cases resolved with outpatient antibiotic treatment.9

Keep in mind that this is an ongoing study—not all women have reached a full 3 years of use. Updates on efficacy and adverse events will be published in the future. This current publication demonstrates the high efficacy and safety of the product through 3 years of use, permitting its approval for contraception in the United States.

In Europe, the product is approved for both contraception and the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding, based on a European study.10

What this EVIDENCE means for practice
Liletta is a branded product (not generic) designed to be similar to Mirena, with the same size, frame, hormone content, and hormone release rate.11 Medicines360 has entered a groundbreaking marketing partnership with Actavis to make Liletta widely available and affordable. For most public sector providers and clinics in the United States, Liletta costs only $50, significantly less than other LARC methods available in the United States. Actavis also has a program that ensures that any woman lacking insurance coverage for an IUD and not receiving care at a public sector clinic will not be charged more than $75 for her IUD. However, the price of the device is only one aspect of its overall cost, as women still need to pay for any office visit or insertion fees.

For society, this unique business partnership has to include providers and patients as well. Sales of Liletta in the private sector will support the very low price in the public sector. As a health care community, even if we do not directly care for women in public-sector settings, we can all help poor women access very affordable highly effective contraception.

For providers, Liletta is a lower-cost alternative to currently available hormonal IUDs and should perform well over the long term. The highly successful use of Liletta in nulliparous women demonstrates its safety in this population. The 3-year approval is the first step, as the Phase 3 study continues. In the future, Liletta is expected to be approved for 5 years or longer.

 

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.
2. Guttmacher Institute. Fact Sheet: Unintended Pregnancy in the United States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
3. Singh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241–250.
4. Henshaw SK. Unintended pregnancy in the United States. Fam Plann Perspectives. 1998;30(1):24–29, 46.
5. Sonfield A, Kost K. Public costs from unintended pregnancies and the role of public insurance programs in paying for pregnancy-related care. National and States Estimates for 2010. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/public-costs-of-UP-2010.pdf. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
6. Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 30, 2015.
7. Birgisson NE, Zhao Q, Secura GM, Madden T, Peipert JF. Preventing unintended pregnancy: the ContraceptiveCHOICE Project in review. J Womens Health. 2015; 24(5):349–353.
8. Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.
9. Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.
10. Mawet M, Nollevaux F, Nizet D, et al. Impact of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system, Levosert, on heavy menstrual bleeding: results of a one-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2014;19(3):169–179.
11. Gopalakrishnan M, Liu T, Gobburu J, Creinin MD. Levonorgestrel release rates with LNG20, a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(suppl 1): 62S–63S.

References


1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(suppl 1):s43–s48.
2. Guttmacher Institute. Fact Sheet: Unintended Pregnancy in the United States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
3. Singh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241–250.
4. Henshaw SK. Unintended pregnancy in the United States. Fam Plann Perspectives. 1998;30(1):24–29, 46.
5. Sonfield A, Kost K. Public costs from unintended pregnancies and the role of public insurance programs in paying for pregnancy-related care. National and States Estimates for 2010. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/public-costs-of-UP-2010.pdf. Published February 2015. Accessed June 29, 2015.
6. Kost K. Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level: estimates for 2010 and trends since 2002. Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/StateUP10.pdf. Published January 2015. Accessed June 30, 2015.
7. Birgisson NE, Zhao Q, Secura GM, Madden T, Peipert JF. Preventing unintended pregnancy: the ContraceptiveCHOICE Project in review. J Womens Health. 2015; 24(5):349–353.
8. Ricketts S, Klinger G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline of births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–132.
9. Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;92(1):10–16.
10. Mawet M, Nollevaux F, Nizet D, et al. Impact of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system, Levosert, on heavy menstrual bleeding: results of a one-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2014;19(3):169–179.
11. Gopalakrishnan M, Liu T, Gobburu J, Creinin MD. Levonorgestrel release rates with LNG20, a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(suppl 1): 62S–63S.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
32–38
Page Number
32–38
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
2015 Update on contraception
Display Headline
2015 Update on contraception
Legacy Keywords
Jennifer K. Hsia MD MPH, Mitchell D. Creinin MD, update on contraception, contraception, unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, poor women, income below the federal poverty level of reproductive age, contraceptives, abortion rates, rates unplanned births, Medicaid, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, IUS, Liletta, Medicines 360, Actavis, long-acting reversible contraceptives, LARCs, IUDs, intrauterine device, Contraceptive CHOICE Project, ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, CDC, World Health Organization, WHO, Colorado Family Planning Initiative, pregnancy rates, reproductive life plan, ACCESS IUS
Legacy Keywords
Jennifer K. Hsia MD MPH, Mitchell D. Creinin MD, update on contraception, contraception, unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, poor women, income below the federal poverty level of reproductive age, contraceptives, abortion rates, rates unplanned births, Medicaid, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, IUS, Liletta, Medicines 360, Actavis, long-acting reversible contraceptives, LARCs, IUDs, intrauterine device, Contraceptive CHOICE Project, ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, CDC, World Health Organization, WHO, Colorado Family Planning Initiative, pregnancy rates, reproductive life plan, ACCESS IUS
Sections
Inside the Article

    In this Article

 

  • How Colorado broke down barriers to highly effective contraception
  • How to motivate your patient to create a reproductive life plan
  • A more affordable IUD enters the market
Disallow All Ads
Article PDF Media

What the Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell means for women’s health

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 15:22
Display Headline
What the Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell means for women’s health

In a widely anticipated judgment on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the law on June 26, 2015. The case at hand, King v. Burwell, challenged whether individuals purchasing health insurance through federal exchanges were eligible for federal premium subsidies. This ruling cemented the ACA into law and avoided a potential calamity in the private health insurance market. Let’s take a closer look.

What the case was about
The ACA allows states to set up their own health insurance exchanges or participate in a federally run exchange. Although the drafters of the ACA had expected each state to set up its own exchange, two-thirds of the states declined to do so, many in opposition to the ACA. As a result, 7 million citizens in 34 states now purchase their health ­insurance through federally created exchanges.

The plaintiffs in King v. Burwell argued that, because the legislation refers to those enrolled “through an Exchange established by the State,” individuals in states with federally run exchanges are not eligible for subsidies.

The law states:

PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT.—The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of—

(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act…[emphasis added].

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether to adhere to those exact words or to honor Congress’ intent to allow individuals to purchase subsidized insurance on any type of exchange.

What might have happened
We’ve explored in previous articles the interconnectedness of many sections of the ACA. Nowhere is that interconnectedness more clearly demonstrated than here. In order to ensure that private health insurers provide better coverage, the law requires them to abide by important consumer protections, including the elimination of “preexisting condition” exclusions. In order to prevent adverse selection and keep insurers solvent under these new rules, all individuals are required to have health care coverage—the individual mandate. If everyone is required to purchase health insurance, it has to be affordable, so lower-income individuals were promised subsidies, paid for 100% by the federal government, to help them cover their premiums when insurance is purchased through an exchange. Take away the subsidies and the whole thing starts to unravel.

The Urban Institute estimated that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of King, which would have eliminated the subsidies in states using a federal exchange, would have reduced federal tax subsidies by $29 billion in 2016, making coverage unaffordable for many and increasing the ranks of the uninsured by 8.2 million people.1

Louise Sheiner and Brendan Mochoruk of the Brookings Institute speculated that healthy individuals would disproportionately leave the marketplace, triggering 35% increases in insurance premiums for those remaining, as well as significant increases in premiums for those who just lost their subsidies.2 Many observers, including these experts, forecast that insurance companies would exit the federal exchanges altogether, triggering a health insurance “death spiral”: As premiums rise, the healthiest customers leave the marketplace, causing premiums to rise more, causing more healthy people to leave, and so on.

Clearly, this Supreme Court decision has had dramatic, long-term, real-world effects on millions of Americans. On the national level, 6,387,789 individuals were at risk of losing their tax credits if the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of King. That number represents more than $1.7 billion in total monthly tax credits. For a look at how a judgment in favor of King would have affected subsidies on a state-by-state basis, see TABLE 1.




What other commentators are saying about the King v. Burwell decision

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the “meaning of the phrase ‘established by the State’ is not so clear.” And as Amy Howe articulated on SCOTUSblog: “if the phrase…is in fact not clear…then the next step is to look at the Affordable Care Act more broadly to determine what Congress meant by the phrase. And when you do that, the Court reasoned, it becomes apparent that Congress actually intended for the subsidies to be available to everyone who buys health insurance on an exchange, no matter who created it. If the subsidies weren’t available in the states with federal exchanges, the Court explained, the insurance markets in those states simply wouldn’t work properly: without the subsidies, almost all of the people who purchased insurance on the exchanges would no longer be required to purchase insurance because it would be too expensive. This would create a ‘death spiral’….”
—Amy Howe,
SCOTUSblog3

“Additional court challenges to other ACA provisions are still possible, but King’s six-member majority shows little appetite for challenges threatening the Act’s core structure. Even Scalia’s dissent recognizes that the ACA may one day ‘attain the enduring status of the Social Security Act.’ Thus, the decision may usher in a new era of policy maturity, in which efforts to undermine the ACA diminish, as focus shifts to efforts to implement and improve it.”
—Mark A. Hall, JD,
New England Journal of Medicine4

“With the Court upholding the administration’s interpretation of the law, the Obama administration has little reason to accede to
Republican proposals. The Court’s decision effectively puts the future of the ACA on hold until the 2016 elections, when the people will decide whether to stay the course or to chart a very different path.”
—Timothy Jost,
Health Affairs5

“A case that 6 months ago seemed to offer the Court’s conservatives a low-risk opportunity to accomplish what they almost did in 2012—kill the Affordable Care Act—became suffused with danger, for the millions of newly insured Americans, of course, but also for the Supreme Court itself. Ideology came face to face with reality, and reality prevailed.”
—Linda Greenhouse,
New York Times6

 

 


How premium subsidies work
Premium subsidies are actually tax credits. Individuals and families can qualify for them to purchase any type of health insurance offered on an exchange, except catastrophic coverage. To receive the premium tax credit for coverage starting in 2015, a marketplace enrollee must:

  • have a household income that is 1 to4 times the federal poverty level. In 2015, the range of incomes that qualify for subsidies is $11,670 for an individual and $23,850 for a family of 4 at 100% of the federal poverty level. At 400% of the federal poverty level, it is $46,680 for an individual and $95,400 for a family of 4.
  • lack access to affordable coverage through an employer (including a family member’s employer)
  • be ineligible for coverage through Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or other forms of public assistance
  • have US citizenship or proof of legal residency
  • file taxes jointly if married.

The premium tax credit caps the amount that an individual or family must spend on their monthly payments for health insurance. The cap depends on the family’s income; lower-income families have a lower cap. The amount of the tax credit remains the same, so a person who purchases a more expensive plan pays the cost difference (TABLE 2).


The ruling’s effect on women’s health

On June 26, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists President Mark S. DeFrancesco, MD, MBA, hailed the Supreme Court decision, saying, “Importantly, recent data have shown that newly insured adults under the ACA were more likely to be ­women. Those who did gain coverage through the ACA reported better access to health care and better financial security from medical costs.”

“Without question, many women enrollees were able to purchase health insurance coverage due, in part, to the ACA subsidies that helped make this purchase affordable. In fact, government data have suggested that roughly 85% of health exchange enrollees received subsidies,” Dr. DeFrancesco said.

“If the Supreme Court had overturned this important assistance, approximately 4.8 million women would have been unable to afford the coverage that they need. The impact also would have been widespread; as these women were forced to leave the insurance marketplace, it is likely that premiums throughout the marketplace would have risen dramatically,” he continued.

“Instead, patients—especially the low- and moderate-income American women who have particularly benefited from ACA subsidies—will continue to have the peace of mind that comes with insurance coverage.”

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References

1. Blumberg LJ, Buettgens M, Holahan J. The implications of a Supreme Court finding for the plaintiff in King v. Burwell: 8.2 million more uninsured and 35% higher premiums. Urban Institute. http://www.urban.org/research/publication/implications-supreme-court-finding-plaintiff-king-vs-burwell-82-million-more-uninsured-and-35-higher-premiums. Published January 8, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

2. Sheiner L, Mochoruk B. King v. Burwell explained. Brookings Institute. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/health360/posts/2015/03/03-king-v-burwell-explainer-sheiner. Published March 3, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

3. Howe A. Court backs Obama administration on health care subsidies: In plain English. SCOTUSblog. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/court-backs-obama-administration-on-health-care-subsidies-in-plain-english/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

4. Hall MA. King v. Burwell—ACA Armageddon averted. N Engl J Med. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1504077. Published July 1, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

5. Jost T. Implementing health reform: The Supreme Court upholds tax credits in the federal exchange. Health Affairs blog. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2015/06/25/implementing-health-reform-the-supreme-court-upholds-tax-credits-in-the-federal-exchange/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

6. Greenhouse L. The Roberts Court’s reality check. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/the-roberts-courts-reality-check.html. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

7. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Explaining health care reform: questions about health insurance subsidies. Table 2. http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-health-care-reform-questions-about-health/. Published October 27, 2014. Accessed July 2, 2015.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Lucia DiVenere, MA

Ms. DiVenere is Officer, Government and Political Affairs, at the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Washington, DC.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
28–31, e1.
Legacy Keywords
Lucia DiVenere MA, Supreme Court, King v. Burwell, Affordable Care Act, ACA, Obama Administration, federal premium subsidies, health insurance exchanges, private health insurance market, Urban Institute, Brookings Institute, Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog, Mark A. Hall JD, New England Journal of Medicine, Timothy Jost, Health Affairs, Linda Greenhouse, New York Times, Chief Justice John Roberts, tax credits, household income, poverty level, ACOG, Mark S. DeFrancesco MD, women's health care,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Lucia DiVenere, MA

Ms. DiVenere is Officer, Government and Political Affairs, at the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Washington, DC.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Lucia DiVenere, MA

Ms. DiVenere is Officer, Government and Political Affairs, at the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Washington, DC.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

In a widely anticipated judgment on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the law on June 26, 2015. The case at hand, King v. Burwell, challenged whether individuals purchasing health insurance through federal exchanges were eligible for federal premium subsidies. This ruling cemented the ACA into law and avoided a potential calamity in the private health insurance market. Let’s take a closer look.

What the case was about
The ACA allows states to set up their own health insurance exchanges or participate in a federally run exchange. Although the drafters of the ACA had expected each state to set up its own exchange, two-thirds of the states declined to do so, many in opposition to the ACA. As a result, 7 million citizens in 34 states now purchase their health ­insurance through federally created exchanges.

The plaintiffs in King v. Burwell argued that, because the legislation refers to those enrolled “through an Exchange established by the State,” individuals in states with federally run exchanges are not eligible for subsidies.

The law states:

PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT.—The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of—

(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act…[emphasis added].

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether to adhere to those exact words or to honor Congress’ intent to allow individuals to purchase subsidized insurance on any type of exchange.

What might have happened
We’ve explored in previous articles the interconnectedness of many sections of the ACA. Nowhere is that interconnectedness more clearly demonstrated than here. In order to ensure that private health insurers provide better coverage, the law requires them to abide by important consumer protections, including the elimination of “preexisting condition” exclusions. In order to prevent adverse selection and keep insurers solvent under these new rules, all individuals are required to have health care coverage—the individual mandate. If everyone is required to purchase health insurance, it has to be affordable, so lower-income individuals were promised subsidies, paid for 100% by the federal government, to help them cover their premiums when insurance is purchased through an exchange. Take away the subsidies and the whole thing starts to unravel.

The Urban Institute estimated that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of King, which would have eliminated the subsidies in states using a federal exchange, would have reduced federal tax subsidies by $29 billion in 2016, making coverage unaffordable for many and increasing the ranks of the uninsured by 8.2 million people.1

Louise Sheiner and Brendan Mochoruk of the Brookings Institute speculated that healthy individuals would disproportionately leave the marketplace, triggering 35% increases in insurance premiums for those remaining, as well as significant increases in premiums for those who just lost their subsidies.2 Many observers, including these experts, forecast that insurance companies would exit the federal exchanges altogether, triggering a health insurance “death spiral”: As premiums rise, the healthiest customers leave the marketplace, causing premiums to rise more, causing more healthy people to leave, and so on.

Clearly, this Supreme Court decision has had dramatic, long-term, real-world effects on millions of Americans. On the national level, 6,387,789 individuals were at risk of losing their tax credits if the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of King. That number represents more than $1.7 billion in total monthly tax credits. For a look at how a judgment in favor of King would have affected subsidies on a state-by-state basis, see TABLE 1.




What other commentators are saying about the King v. Burwell decision

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the “meaning of the phrase ‘established by the State’ is not so clear.” And as Amy Howe articulated on SCOTUSblog: “if the phrase…is in fact not clear…then the next step is to look at the Affordable Care Act more broadly to determine what Congress meant by the phrase. And when you do that, the Court reasoned, it becomes apparent that Congress actually intended for the subsidies to be available to everyone who buys health insurance on an exchange, no matter who created it. If the subsidies weren’t available in the states with federal exchanges, the Court explained, the insurance markets in those states simply wouldn’t work properly: without the subsidies, almost all of the people who purchased insurance on the exchanges would no longer be required to purchase insurance because it would be too expensive. This would create a ‘death spiral’….”
—Amy Howe,
SCOTUSblog3

“Additional court challenges to other ACA provisions are still possible, but King’s six-member majority shows little appetite for challenges threatening the Act’s core structure. Even Scalia’s dissent recognizes that the ACA may one day ‘attain the enduring status of the Social Security Act.’ Thus, the decision may usher in a new era of policy maturity, in which efforts to undermine the ACA diminish, as focus shifts to efforts to implement and improve it.”
—Mark A. Hall, JD,
New England Journal of Medicine4

“With the Court upholding the administration’s interpretation of the law, the Obama administration has little reason to accede to
Republican proposals. The Court’s decision effectively puts the future of the ACA on hold until the 2016 elections, when the people will decide whether to stay the course or to chart a very different path.”
—Timothy Jost,
Health Affairs5

“A case that 6 months ago seemed to offer the Court’s conservatives a low-risk opportunity to accomplish what they almost did in 2012—kill the Affordable Care Act—became suffused with danger, for the millions of newly insured Americans, of course, but also for the Supreme Court itself. Ideology came face to face with reality, and reality prevailed.”
—Linda Greenhouse,
New York Times6

 

 


How premium subsidies work
Premium subsidies are actually tax credits. Individuals and families can qualify for them to purchase any type of health insurance offered on an exchange, except catastrophic coverage. To receive the premium tax credit for coverage starting in 2015, a marketplace enrollee must:

  • have a household income that is 1 to4 times the federal poverty level. In 2015, the range of incomes that qualify for subsidies is $11,670 for an individual and $23,850 for a family of 4 at 100% of the federal poverty level. At 400% of the federal poverty level, it is $46,680 for an individual and $95,400 for a family of 4.
  • lack access to affordable coverage through an employer (including a family member’s employer)
  • be ineligible for coverage through Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or other forms of public assistance
  • have US citizenship or proof of legal residency
  • file taxes jointly if married.

The premium tax credit caps the amount that an individual or family must spend on their monthly payments for health insurance. The cap depends on the family’s income; lower-income families have a lower cap. The amount of the tax credit remains the same, so a person who purchases a more expensive plan pays the cost difference (TABLE 2).


The ruling’s effect on women’s health

On June 26, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists President Mark S. DeFrancesco, MD, MBA, hailed the Supreme Court decision, saying, “Importantly, recent data have shown that newly insured adults under the ACA were more likely to be ­women. Those who did gain coverage through the ACA reported better access to health care and better financial security from medical costs.”

“Without question, many women enrollees were able to purchase health insurance coverage due, in part, to the ACA subsidies that helped make this purchase affordable. In fact, government data have suggested that roughly 85% of health exchange enrollees received subsidies,” Dr. DeFrancesco said.

“If the Supreme Court had overturned this important assistance, approximately 4.8 million women would have been unable to afford the coverage that they need. The impact also would have been widespread; as these women were forced to leave the insurance marketplace, it is likely that premiums throughout the marketplace would have risen dramatically,” he continued.

“Instead, patients—especially the low- and moderate-income American women who have particularly benefited from ACA subsidies—will continue to have the peace of mind that comes with insurance coverage.”

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

In a widely anticipated judgment on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the law on June 26, 2015. The case at hand, King v. Burwell, challenged whether individuals purchasing health insurance through federal exchanges were eligible for federal premium subsidies. This ruling cemented the ACA into law and avoided a potential calamity in the private health insurance market. Let’s take a closer look.

What the case was about
The ACA allows states to set up their own health insurance exchanges or participate in a federally run exchange. Although the drafters of the ACA had expected each state to set up its own exchange, two-thirds of the states declined to do so, many in opposition to the ACA. As a result, 7 million citizens in 34 states now purchase their health ­insurance through federally created exchanges.

The plaintiffs in King v. Burwell argued that, because the legislation refers to those enrolled “through an Exchange established by the State,” individuals in states with federally run exchanges are not eligible for subsidies.

The law states:

PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT.—The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of—

(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act…[emphasis added].

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether to adhere to those exact words or to honor Congress’ intent to allow individuals to purchase subsidized insurance on any type of exchange.

What might have happened
We’ve explored in previous articles the interconnectedness of many sections of the ACA. Nowhere is that interconnectedness more clearly demonstrated than here. In order to ensure that private health insurers provide better coverage, the law requires them to abide by important consumer protections, including the elimination of “preexisting condition” exclusions. In order to prevent adverse selection and keep insurers solvent under these new rules, all individuals are required to have health care coverage—the individual mandate. If everyone is required to purchase health insurance, it has to be affordable, so lower-income individuals were promised subsidies, paid for 100% by the federal government, to help them cover their premiums when insurance is purchased through an exchange. Take away the subsidies and the whole thing starts to unravel.

The Urban Institute estimated that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of King, which would have eliminated the subsidies in states using a federal exchange, would have reduced federal tax subsidies by $29 billion in 2016, making coverage unaffordable for many and increasing the ranks of the uninsured by 8.2 million people.1

Louise Sheiner and Brendan Mochoruk of the Brookings Institute speculated that healthy individuals would disproportionately leave the marketplace, triggering 35% increases in insurance premiums for those remaining, as well as significant increases in premiums for those who just lost their subsidies.2 Many observers, including these experts, forecast that insurance companies would exit the federal exchanges altogether, triggering a health insurance “death spiral”: As premiums rise, the healthiest customers leave the marketplace, causing premiums to rise more, causing more healthy people to leave, and so on.

Clearly, this Supreme Court decision has had dramatic, long-term, real-world effects on millions of Americans. On the national level, 6,387,789 individuals were at risk of losing their tax credits if the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of King. That number represents more than $1.7 billion in total monthly tax credits. For a look at how a judgment in favor of King would have affected subsidies on a state-by-state basis, see TABLE 1.




What other commentators are saying about the King v. Burwell decision

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the “meaning of the phrase ‘established by the State’ is not so clear.” And as Amy Howe articulated on SCOTUSblog: “if the phrase…is in fact not clear…then the next step is to look at the Affordable Care Act more broadly to determine what Congress meant by the phrase. And when you do that, the Court reasoned, it becomes apparent that Congress actually intended for the subsidies to be available to everyone who buys health insurance on an exchange, no matter who created it. If the subsidies weren’t available in the states with federal exchanges, the Court explained, the insurance markets in those states simply wouldn’t work properly: without the subsidies, almost all of the people who purchased insurance on the exchanges would no longer be required to purchase insurance because it would be too expensive. This would create a ‘death spiral’….”
—Amy Howe,
SCOTUSblog3

“Additional court challenges to other ACA provisions are still possible, but King’s six-member majority shows little appetite for challenges threatening the Act’s core structure. Even Scalia’s dissent recognizes that the ACA may one day ‘attain the enduring status of the Social Security Act.’ Thus, the decision may usher in a new era of policy maturity, in which efforts to undermine the ACA diminish, as focus shifts to efforts to implement and improve it.”
—Mark A. Hall, JD,
New England Journal of Medicine4

“With the Court upholding the administration’s interpretation of the law, the Obama administration has little reason to accede to
Republican proposals. The Court’s decision effectively puts the future of the ACA on hold until the 2016 elections, when the people will decide whether to stay the course or to chart a very different path.”
—Timothy Jost,
Health Affairs5

“A case that 6 months ago seemed to offer the Court’s conservatives a low-risk opportunity to accomplish what they almost did in 2012—kill the Affordable Care Act—became suffused with danger, for the millions of newly insured Americans, of course, but also for the Supreme Court itself. Ideology came face to face with reality, and reality prevailed.”
—Linda Greenhouse,
New York Times6

 

 


How premium subsidies work
Premium subsidies are actually tax credits. Individuals and families can qualify for them to purchase any type of health insurance offered on an exchange, except catastrophic coverage. To receive the premium tax credit for coverage starting in 2015, a marketplace enrollee must:

  • have a household income that is 1 to4 times the federal poverty level. In 2015, the range of incomes that qualify for subsidies is $11,670 for an individual and $23,850 for a family of 4 at 100% of the federal poverty level. At 400% of the federal poverty level, it is $46,680 for an individual and $95,400 for a family of 4.
  • lack access to affordable coverage through an employer (including a family member’s employer)
  • be ineligible for coverage through Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or other forms of public assistance
  • have US citizenship or proof of legal residency
  • file taxes jointly if married.

The premium tax credit caps the amount that an individual or family must spend on their monthly payments for health insurance. The cap depends on the family’s income; lower-income families have a lower cap. The amount of the tax credit remains the same, so a person who purchases a more expensive plan pays the cost difference (TABLE 2).


The ruling’s effect on women’s health

On June 26, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists President Mark S. DeFrancesco, MD, MBA, hailed the Supreme Court decision, saying, “Importantly, recent data have shown that newly insured adults under the ACA were more likely to be ­women. Those who did gain coverage through the ACA reported better access to health care and better financial security from medical costs.”

“Without question, many women enrollees were able to purchase health insurance coverage due, in part, to the ACA subsidies that helped make this purchase affordable. In fact, government data have suggested that roughly 85% of health exchange enrollees received subsidies,” Dr. DeFrancesco said.

“If the Supreme Court had overturned this important assistance, approximately 4.8 million women would have been unable to afford the coverage that they need. The impact also would have been widespread; as these women were forced to leave the insurance marketplace, it is likely that premiums throughout the marketplace would have risen dramatically,” he continued.

“Instead, patients—especially the low- and moderate-income American women who have particularly benefited from ACA subsidies—will continue to have the peace of mind that comes with insurance coverage.”

Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References

1. Blumberg LJ, Buettgens M, Holahan J. The implications of a Supreme Court finding for the plaintiff in King v. Burwell: 8.2 million more uninsured and 35% higher premiums. Urban Institute. http://www.urban.org/research/publication/implications-supreme-court-finding-plaintiff-king-vs-burwell-82-million-more-uninsured-and-35-higher-premiums. Published January 8, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

2. Sheiner L, Mochoruk B. King v. Burwell explained. Brookings Institute. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/health360/posts/2015/03/03-king-v-burwell-explainer-sheiner. Published March 3, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

3. Howe A. Court backs Obama administration on health care subsidies: In plain English. SCOTUSblog. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/court-backs-obama-administration-on-health-care-subsidies-in-plain-english/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

4. Hall MA. King v. Burwell—ACA Armageddon averted. N Engl J Med. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1504077. Published July 1, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

5. Jost T. Implementing health reform: The Supreme Court upholds tax credits in the federal exchange. Health Affairs blog. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2015/06/25/implementing-health-reform-the-supreme-court-upholds-tax-credits-in-the-federal-exchange/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

6. Greenhouse L. The Roberts Court’s reality check. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/the-roberts-courts-reality-check.html. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

7. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Explaining health care reform: questions about health insurance subsidies. Table 2. http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-health-care-reform-questions-about-health/. Published October 27, 2014. Accessed July 2, 2015.

References

1. Blumberg LJ, Buettgens M, Holahan J. The implications of a Supreme Court finding for the plaintiff in King v. Burwell: 8.2 million more uninsured and 35% higher premiums. Urban Institute. http://www.urban.org/research/publication/implications-supreme-court-finding-plaintiff-king-vs-burwell-82-million-more-uninsured-and-35-higher-premiums. Published January 8, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

2. Sheiner L, Mochoruk B. King v. Burwell explained. Brookings Institute. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/health360/posts/2015/03/03-king-v-burwell-explainer-sheiner. Published March 3, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

3. Howe A. Court backs Obama administration on health care subsidies: In plain English. SCOTUSblog. http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/court-backs-obama-administration-on-health-care-subsidies-in-plain-english/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

4. Hall MA. King v. Burwell—ACA Armageddon averted. N Engl J Med. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1504077. Published July 1, 2015. Accessed July 2, 2015.

5. Jost T. Implementing health reform: The Supreme Court upholds tax credits in the federal exchange. Health Affairs blog. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2015/06/25/implementing-health-reform-the-supreme-court-upholds-tax-credits-in-the-federal-exchange/. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

6. Greenhouse L. The Roberts Court’s reality check. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/the-roberts-courts-reality-check.html. Published June 25, 2015. Accessed July 1, 2015.

7. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Explaining health care reform: questions about health insurance subsidies. Table 2. http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-health-care-reform-questions-about-health/. Published October 27, 2014. Accessed July 2, 2015.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
28–31, e1.
Page Number
28–31, e1.
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
What the Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell means for women’s health
Display Headline
What the Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell means for women’s health
Legacy Keywords
Lucia DiVenere MA, Supreme Court, King v. Burwell, Affordable Care Act, ACA, Obama Administration, federal premium subsidies, health insurance exchanges, private health insurance market, Urban Institute, Brookings Institute, Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog, Mark A. Hall JD, New England Journal of Medicine, Timothy Jost, Health Affairs, Linda Greenhouse, New York Times, Chief Justice John Roberts, tax credits, household income, poverty level, ACOG, Mark S. DeFrancesco MD, women's health care,
Legacy Keywords
Lucia DiVenere MA, Supreme Court, King v. Burwell, Affordable Care Act, ACA, Obama Administration, federal premium subsidies, health insurance exchanges, private health insurance market, Urban Institute, Brookings Institute, Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog, Mark A. Hall JD, New England Journal of Medicine, Timothy Jost, Health Affairs, Linda Greenhouse, New York Times, Chief Justice John Roberts, tax credits, household income, poverty level, ACOG, Mark S. DeFrancesco MD, women's health care,
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Intragestational injection of methotrexate

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
Intragestational injection of methotrexate

The presentation of a cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy can at times be daunting, especially without familiarity regarding its management. Women with cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy most often have no symptoms, although vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain can present. Upon visual diagnosis with transabdominal or transvaginal ultrasound, the preferred treatment method is direct injection of methotrexate into the gestational sac within the cesarean scar.

In this video, my colleagues review the indications and contraindications for direct injection of  methotrexate as well as alternative treatment methods for this type of nonviable pregnancy that is increasing in frequency (given the US cesarean delivery rate). Demonstrated is the technique for methotrexate injection in the case of a 34-year-old woman (G6P0232) with ultrasound and beta−human chorionic gonadotropin confirmation of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy.

We hope this video serves as a useful reference in your practice.

 

Vidyard Video

 

Share your thoughts on this video! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Lerner is Associate Clinical Professor in Maternal-Fetal Medicine and Director of Ultrasound, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Horvath is PGY-4 Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center. 

Dr. Simpson is Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellow, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center.

Dr. Advincula is the Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health and Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Advincula reports being a consultant to Blue Endo, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, SurgiQuest, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
39
Legacy Keywords
Arnold P. Advincula MD, Jodi P. Lerner MD, Sara Horvath MD, Khara Simpson MD, complicated ectopic pregnancy, intragestational injection of methrotrexate, cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, vaginal bleeding, abdominal pain, transabdominal ultrasound, transvaginal ultrasound, methotrexate, gestational sac, nonviable pregnancy, beta-human chorionic gonadotropin
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Lerner is Associate Clinical Professor in Maternal-Fetal Medicine and Director of Ultrasound, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Horvath is PGY-4 Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center. 

Dr. Simpson is Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellow, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center.

Dr. Advincula is the Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health and Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Advincula reports being a consultant to Blue Endo, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, SurgiQuest, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Lerner is Associate Clinical Professor in Maternal-Fetal Medicine and Director of Ultrasound, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Horvath is PGY-4 Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center. 

Dr. Simpson is Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellow, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center.

Dr. Advincula is the Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health and Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Advincula reports being a consultant to Blue Endo, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, SurgiQuest, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

The presentation of a cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy can at times be daunting, especially without familiarity regarding its management. Women with cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy most often have no symptoms, although vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain can present. Upon visual diagnosis with transabdominal or transvaginal ultrasound, the preferred treatment method is direct injection of methotrexate into the gestational sac within the cesarean scar.

In this video, my colleagues review the indications and contraindications for direct injection of  methotrexate as well as alternative treatment methods for this type of nonviable pregnancy that is increasing in frequency (given the US cesarean delivery rate). Demonstrated is the technique for methotrexate injection in the case of a 34-year-old woman (G6P0232) with ultrasound and beta−human chorionic gonadotropin confirmation of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy.

We hope this video serves as a useful reference in your practice.

 

Vidyard Video

 

Share your thoughts on this video! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

The presentation of a cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy can at times be daunting, especially without familiarity regarding its management. Women with cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy most often have no symptoms, although vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain can present. Upon visual diagnosis with transabdominal or transvaginal ultrasound, the preferred treatment method is direct injection of methotrexate into the gestational sac within the cesarean scar.

In this video, my colleagues review the indications and contraindications for direct injection of  methotrexate as well as alternative treatment methods for this type of nonviable pregnancy that is increasing in frequency (given the US cesarean delivery rate). Demonstrated is the technique for methotrexate injection in the case of a 34-year-old woman (G6P0232) with ultrasound and beta−human chorionic gonadotropin confirmation of cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy.

We hope this video serves as a useful reference in your practice.

 

Vidyard Video

 

Share your thoughts on this video! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
39
Page Number
39
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Intragestational injection of methotrexate
Display Headline
Intragestational injection of methotrexate
Legacy Keywords
Arnold P. Advincula MD, Jodi P. Lerner MD, Sara Horvath MD, Khara Simpson MD, complicated ectopic pregnancy, intragestational injection of methrotrexate, cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, vaginal bleeding, abdominal pain, transabdominal ultrasound, transvaginal ultrasound, methotrexate, gestational sac, nonviable pregnancy, beta-human chorionic gonadotropin
Legacy Keywords
Arnold P. Advincula MD, Jodi P. Lerner MD, Sara Horvath MD, Khara Simpson MD, complicated ectopic pregnancy, intragestational injection of methrotrexate, cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy, vaginal bleeding, abdominal pain, transabdominal ultrasound, transvaginal ultrasound, methotrexate, gestational sac, nonviable pregnancy, beta-human chorionic gonadotropin
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Use ProPublica
Article PDF Media

Is menopausal hormone therapy safe when your patient carries a BRCA mutation?

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
Is menopausal hormone therapy safe when your patient carries a BRCA mutation?

Case: Disabling vasomotor symptoms in a BRCA1 mutation carrier
Christine is a 39-year-old mother of 2 who underwent risk-reducing, minimally invasive bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with hysterectomy 4 months ago for a BRCA1 mutation (with benign findings on pathology). Eighteen months before that surgery, she had risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction (implants) and was advised by her surgeon that she no longer needs breast imaging.

Today she reports disabling hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, and painful sex. Her previous ObGyn, who performed the hysterectomy, was unwilling to prescribe hormone therapy (HT) due to safety concerns. Christine tried venlafaxine at 37 to 75 mg but noted little relief of her vasomotor symptoms.

In discussing her symptoms with you during this initial visit, Christine, a practicing accountant, also reveals that she does not feel as intellectually “sharp” as she did before her gynecologic surgery.

What can you offer for relief of her symptoms?

More BRCA mutation carriers are being identified and choosing to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and bilateral mastectomy. Accordingly, clinicians are likely to face more questions about the use of systemic HT in this population. Because mutation carriers may worry about the safety of HT, given their BRCA status, some may delay or avoid salpingo-oophorectomy—a surgery that not only reduces the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer by 80% but also decreases the risk of breast cancer by 48%.1

Surgically menopausal women in their 30s or 40s who are not treated with HT appear to have an elevated risk for dementia and Parkinsonism.2 In addition, vasomotor symptoms are often more severe, and the risks for osteoporosis and, likely, cardiovascular disease are elevated in women with early menopause who are not treated with HT. For these reasons, systemic HT is recommended for women with early menopause, and generally should be continued at least until the normal age of menopause unless specific contraindications are present.3

Because Christine not only has had risk-reducing gynecologic surgery but also risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, her current risk for breast cancer is very low whether or not she uses HT. Because she does not have a uterus, her symptoms can effectively and safely be treated with systemic estrogen-only therapy.

Among clinicians with special expertise in the management of BRCA mutation carriers, the use of systemic HT would be considered appropriate—and not controversial—in this setting.4

Angelina Jolie details her surgeries
In March 2015, 39-year-old Oscar-winning actress and filmmaker Angelina Jolie Pitt published an opinion piece in the New York Times detailing her recent laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy and initiation of HT.5 Ms. Jolie Pitt, who carries the BRCA1 mutation, lost her mother, grandmother, and aunt to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Two years earlier, Ms. Jolie Pitt made news by describing her decision to move ahead with risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy.

Following her risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, she initiated systemic HT using transdermal estradiol and off-label use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for endometrial protection.

Her courageous decision to publicly describe her surgery and subsequent initiation of systemic HT will likely encourage women with ominous family histories to seek out genetic counseling and testing. Her decision to “go public” regarding surgery should help mutation carriers without a history of cancer (known in the BRCA community as “previvors”) who have completed their families to move forward with risk-reducing gynecologic surgery and, when appropriate, use of systemic HT.6

The outlook for previvors with intact breasts
Three studies address the risk of breast cancer with use of systemic HT among previvors with intact breasts. A 2005 study followed a cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts, 155 of whom had undergone risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, for a mean of 3.6 years. Of these women, 60% and 7%, respectively, of those who had and had not undergone salpingo-oophorectomy used HT. The authors noted that bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy reduced the risk of breast cancer by some 60%, whether or not women used HT.7

A 2008 case-control study focused on 472 menopausal BRCA1 carriers, half of whom had been diagnosed with breast cancer (cases); the other half had not received this diagnosis (controls). A 43% reduction in the risk of breast cancer was associated with prior use of HT.8

A 2011 presentation described a cohort study in which 1,299 BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts who had undergone salpingo-oophorectomy were followed for a mean of 5.4 years postoperatively. In this population, use of HT was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Among women with BRCA1 mutations, use of systemic HT was associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer.9

Viewed in aggregate, these studies reassure us that short-term use of systemic HT does not increase breast cancer risk in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and intact breasts.

 

 

Dr. Simon
Nevertheless, I think it is important to point out that a properly powered study to assess actual risk in this setting is not available in the literature.

When a patient refuses HT
Dr. Pinkerton
Some BRCA mutation carriers may refuse HT despite reassurance that it is safe. Nonhormonal therapies are not as effective at relieving severe menopausal symptoms. Almost all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) can be offered, although only low-dose paroxetine salt is approved for treatment of postmenopausal hot flashes.10,11 Gabapentin also has shown efficacy in relieving hot flashes.

For genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM; formerly known as vulvovaginal atrophy), lubricants and moisturizers may provide some benefit, but they don’t improve the vaginal superficial cells and, therefore, are not as effective as hormonal options. There is now a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) approved to treat GSM—ospemifene. However, in clinical trials, ospemifene has been shown to increase hot flashes, so it would not be a good option for our patient.12

Case: Continued
Christine follows up 3 months after initiating estrogen therapy (oral estradiol 2 mg daily). She reports significant improvement in her hot flashes, with improved sleep and fewer sleep disruptions. In addition, she feels that her “mental sharpness” has returned.

Dr. Pinkerton
What if this patient had an intact uterus? Then she would not be a candidate for estrogen-only therapy because she would need continued endometrial protection. Options then would include low-dose continuous or cyclic progestogen therapy, often starting with micronized progesterone, as the E3N Study suggested it has a less negative effect on the uterus.13 Or she could use a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system off label, as Ms. Jolie Pitt elected to do.

Another option would be combining estrogen with a SERM. The only estrogen/SERM combination currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is conjugated estrogen/bazedoxefine, which showed no increase in breast tenderness, breast density, or bleeding rates, compared with placebo, in multiple trials up to 5 years in duration.14

Case: Resolved
Christine says she would like to continue HT, although she still experiences dryness and discomfort when sexually active with her husband, despite use of a vaginal lubricant. A pelvic examination is consistent with early changes of GSM.15

You discuss GSM with Christine and suggest that she consider 1 of 2 strategies:

 

  • Switch from daily use of oral estradiol to the 3-month systemic 0.1-mg estradiol ring (Femring), which would address both her vasomotor symptoms and her GSM.
  • Continue oral estradiol and add low-dose vaginal estrogen (cream, tablets, or Estring 2 mg).

Christine chooses Option 2. When she returns 6 months later for her well-woman visit, she reports that all of her menopausal symptoms have resolved, and a pelvic examination no longer reveals changes of GSM.

 

Share your thoughts on this article! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Finch AP, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1547–1553.
2. Rocca WA, Bower JH, Maraganore DM, et al. Increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in women who underwent oophorectomy before menopause. Neurology. 2007;69(11):1074–1083.
3. North American Menopause Society. The 2012 hormone therapy position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2012;19(3):257–271.
4. Finch AP, Evans G, Narod SA. BRCA carriers, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and menopause: clinical management considerations and recommendations. Womens Health (Lond Engl). 2012;8(5):543–555.
5. Pitt AJ. Angelina Jolie Pitt: Diary of a Surgery. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/opinion/angelina-jolie-pitt-diary-of-a-surgery.html. Published March 24, 2015. Accessed July 9, 2015.
6. Holman L, Brandt A, Daniels M, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and prophylactic mastectomy among BRCA mutation “previvors.” Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127(1 suppl):S17.
7. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Wagner T, et al; PROSE Study Group. Effect of short-term hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk reduction after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(31):7804–7810.
8. Eisen A, Lubinski J, Gronwald J, et al; Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. Hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(19):1361–1367.
9. Domchek SM, Mitchell G, Lindeman GJ, et al. Challenges to the development of new agents for molecularly defined patient subsets: lessons from BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(32):4224–4226.
10. Krause MS, Nakajima ST. Hormonal and nonhormonal treatment of vasomotor symptoms. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015;42(1):163–179.
11. Simon JA, Portman DJ, Kaunitz AM, et al. Low-dose paroxetine 7.5 mg for menopausal vasomotor symptoms: two randomized controlled trials. Menopause. 2013;20(10):1027–1030.
12. Bachmann GA, Komi JO; Ospemifene Study Group. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
13. Fournier A, Fabre A, Mesrine S, Boutron-Ruault MC, Berrino F, Clavel-Chapelon F. Use of different postmenopausal hormone therapies and risk of histology- and hormone receptor–defined invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1260–1268.
14. Pinkerton JV, Pickar JH, Racketa J, Mirkin S. Bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens for menopausal symptom treatment and osteoporosis prevention. Climacteric. 2012;15(5):411–418.
15. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al; Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information
CASES IN MENOPAUSEBrought to you by the menopause experts


Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville, and Director of Menopause and Gynecologic Ultrasound Services, UF Women’s Health Specialists–Emerson. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton is Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Director, Division of Midlife Women’s Health, at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Dr. Pinkerton is a North American Menopause Society (NAMS) past president and certified menopause practitioner. She also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Simon is Clinical Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, George Washington University, and Medical Director, Women’s Health & Research Consultants, Washington, DC. Dr. Simon is a NAMS past president, a certified menopause practitioner, and clinical densitometrist. He also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton and Dr. Simon provided peer review and comments for Dr. Kaunitz’s case study.

 

Disclosures

Dr. Kaunitz reports that within the past 36 months, he has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from Bayer, Teva, and TherapeuticsMD, and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Actavis, Bayer, and Teva.

Dr. Pinkerton reports that within the past 36 months, she has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from TherapeuticsMD and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Noven, Inc., Pfizer, Shionogi, and TherapeuticsMD.

Dr. Simon reports that within the past 36 months, he has been a consultant to or served on the advisory boards of AbbVie, Actavis, Amgen, Amneal, Apotex, Ascend ­Therapeutics, BioSante, Depomed, Dr. ­Reddy Laboratories, Everett Laboratories, Intimina by Lelo, Lupin, Meda, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Nuelle, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi SA, Sermonix, Shionogi, Shippan Point Advisors, Sprout, Teva, TherapeuticsMD, Warner Chilcott, and Watson.

In the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has received grant/research support from ­AbbVie, ­Actavis, Agile Therapeutics, Bayer Healthcare, Endo­Ceutics, New England Research Institute, Novo Nordisk, Palatin Technologies, Teva, and ­TherapeuticsMD.

Within the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has also served on the speaker’s bureaus of Amgen, Eisai, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Shionogi, Teva, and Warner Chilcott.

Dr. Simon served as Chief Medical Officer of Sprout Pharmaceuticals until April 1, 2013.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
24–26
Legacy Keywords
Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, JoAnn V. Pinkerton MD, James A. Simon MD, menopause, hormone therapy, HT, patient carries a BRCA mutation, BRCA mutation, breast cancer, BRCA1, BRCA2, mutation carrier, intact breasts, risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, systemic hormone therapy, risk of breast cancer, vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, painful sex, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, peritoneal cancer, surgical menopause, dementia, Parkinsonism,
Angelina Jolie, previvors, systemic HT, nonhormonal therapy, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, SNRIs, paroxetine salt, gabapentin, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, selective estrogen receptor modulator, SERM, ospemifene, estrogen therapy, oral estradiol, endometrial protection, progestogen therapy, micronized progesterone,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information
CASES IN MENOPAUSEBrought to you by the menopause experts


Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville, and Director of Menopause and Gynecologic Ultrasound Services, UF Women’s Health Specialists–Emerson. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton is Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Director, Division of Midlife Women’s Health, at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Dr. Pinkerton is a North American Menopause Society (NAMS) past president and certified menopause practitioner. She also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Simon is Clinical Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, George Washington University, and Medical Director, Women’s Health & Research Consultants, Washington, DC. Dr. Simon is a NAMS past president, a certified menopause practitioner, and clinical densitometrist. He also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton and Dr. Simon provided peer review and comments for Dr. Kaunitz’s case study.

 

Disclosures

Dr. Kaunitz reports that within the past 36 months, he has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from Bayer, Teva, and TherapeuticsMD, and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Actavis, Bayer, and Teva.

Dr. Pinkerton reports that within the past 36 months, she has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from TherapeuticsMD and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Noven, Inc., Pfizer, Shionogi, and TherapeuticsMD.

Dr. Simon reports that within the past 36 months, he has been a consultant to or served on the advisory boards of AbbVie, Actavis, Amgen, Amneal, Apotex, Ascend ­Therapeutics, BioSante, Depomed, Dr. ­Reddy Laboratories, Everett Laboratories, Intimina by Lelo, Lupin, Meda, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Nuelle, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi SA, Sermonix, Shionogi, Shippan Point Advisors, Sprout, Teva, TherapeuticsMD, Warner Chilcott, and Watson.

In the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has received grant/research support from ­AbbVie, ­Actavis, Agile Therapeutics, Bayer Healthcare, Endo­Ceutics, New England Research Institute, Novo Nordisk, Palatin Technologies, Teva, and ­TherapeuticsMD.

Within the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has also served on the speaker’s bureaus of Amgen, Eisai, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Shionogi, Teva, and Warner Chilcott.

Dr. Simon served as Chief Medical Officer of Sprout Pharmaceuticals until April 1, 2013.

Author and Disclosure Information
CASES IN MENOPAUSEBrought to you by the menopause experts


Dr. Kaunitz is University of Florida Research Foundation Professor and Associate Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida College of Medicine–Jacksonville, and Director of Menopause and Gynecologic Ultrasound Services, UF Women’s Health Specialists–Emerson. Dr. Kaunitz serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton is Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Director, Division of Midlife Women’s Health, at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Dr. Pinkerton is a North American Menopause Society (NAMS) past president and certified menopause practitioner. She also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Simon is Clinical Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, George Washington University, and Medical Director, Women’s Health & Research Consultants, Washington, DC. Dr. Simon is a NAMS past president, a certified menopause practitioner, and clinical densitometrist. He also serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Pinkerton and Dr. Simon provided peer review and comments for Dr. Kaunitz’s case study.

 

Disclosures

Dr. Kaunitz reports that within the past 36 months, he has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from Bayer, Teva, and TherapeuticsMD, and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Actavis, Bayer, and Teva.

Dr. Pinkerton reports that within the past 36 months, she has received or is currently receiving grant or research support from TherapeuticsMD and has served or is currently serving as a consultant to Noven, Inc., Pfizer, Shionogi, and TherapeuticsMD.

Dr. Simon reports that within the past 36 months, he has been a consultant to or served on the advisory boards of AbbVie, Actavis, Amgen, Amneal, Apotex, Ascend ­Therapeutics, BioSante, Depomed, Dr. ­Reddy Laboratories, Everett Laboratories, Intimina by Lelo, Lupin, Meda, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Nuelle, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi SA, Sermonix, Shionogi, Shippan Point Advisors, Sprout, Teva, TherapeuticsMD, Warner Chilcott, and Watson.

In the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has received grant/research support from ­AbbVie, ­Actavis, Agile Therapeutics, Bayer Healthcare, Endo­Ceutics, New England Research Institute, Novo Nordisk, Palatin Technologies, Teva, and ­TherapeuticsMD.

Within the past 36 months, Dr. Simon has also served on the speaker’s bureaus of Amgen, Eisai, Merck, Novartis, ­Noven, Novo Nordisk, Shionogi, Teva, and Warner Chilcott.

Dr. Simon served as Chief Medical Officer of Sprout Pharmaceuticals until April 1, 2013.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Case: Disabling vasomotor symptoms in a BRCA1 mutation carrier
Christine is a 39-year-old mother of 2 who underwent risk-reducing, minimally invasive bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with hysterectomy 4 months ago for a BRCA1 mutation (with benign findings on pathology). Eighteen months before that surgery, she had risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction (implants) and was advised by her surgeon that she no longer needs breast imaging.

Today she reports disabling hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, and painful sex. Her previous ObGyn, who performed the hysterectomy, was unwilling to prescribe hormone therapy (HT) due to safety concerns. Christine tried venlafaxine at 37 to 75 mg but noted little relief of her vasomotor symptoms.

In discussing her symptoms with you during this initial visit, Christine, a practicing accountant, also reveals that she does not feel as intellectually “sharp” as she did before her gynecologic surgery.

What can you offer for relief of her symptoms?

More BRCA mutation carriers are being identified and choosing to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and bilateral mastectomy. Accordingly, clinicians are likely to face more questions about the use of systemic HT in this population. Because mutation carriers may worry about the safety of HT, given their BRCA status, some may delay or avoid salpingo-oophorectomy—a surgery that not only reduces the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer by 80% but also decreases the risk of breast cancer by 48%.1

Surgically menopausal women in their 30s or 40s who are not treated with HT appear to have an elevated risk for dementia and Parkinsonism.2 In addition, vasomotor symptoms are often more severe, and the risks for osteoporosis and, likely, cardiovascular disease are elevated in women with early menopause who are not treated with HT. For these reasons, systemic HT is recommended for women with early menopause, and generally should be continued at least until the normal age of menopause unless specific contraindications are present.3

Because Christine not only has had risk-reducing gynecologic surgery but also risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, her current risk for breast cancer is very low whether or not she uses HT. Because she does not have a uterus, her symptoms can effectively and safely be treated with systemic estrogen-only therapy.

Among clinicians with special expertise in the management of BRCA mutation carriers, the use of systemic HT would be considered appropriate—and not controversial—in this setting.4

Angelina Jolie details her surgeries
In March 2015, 39-year-old Oscar-winning actress and filmmaker Angelina Jolie Pitt published an opinion piece in the New York Times detailing her recent laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy and initiation of HT.5 Ms. Jolie Pitt, who carries the BRCA1 mutation, lost her mother, grandmother, and aunt to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Two years earlier, Ms. Jolie Pitt made news by describing her decision to move ahead with risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy.

Following her risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, she initiated systemic HT using transdermal estradiol and off-label use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for endometrial protection.

Her courageous decision to publicly describe her surgery and subsequent initiation of systemic HT will likely encourage women with ominous family histories to seek out genetic counseling and testing. Her decision to “go public” regarding surgery should help mutation carriers without a history of cancer (known in the BRCA community as “previvors”) who have completed their families to move forward with risk-reducing gynecologic surgery and, when appropriate, use of systemic HT.6

The outlook for previvors with intact breasts
Three studies address the risk of breast cancer with use of systemic HT among previvors with intact breasts. A 2005 study followed a cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts, 155 of whom had undergone risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, for a mean of 3.6 years. Of these women, 60% and 7%, respectively, of those who had and had not undergone salpingo-oophorectomy used HT. The authors noted that bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy reduced the risk of breast cancer by some 60%, whether or not women used HT.7

A 2008 case-control study focused on 472 menopausal BRCA1 carriers, half of whom had been diagnosed with breast cancer (cases); the other half had not received this diagnosis (controls). A 43% reduction in the risk of breast cancer was associated with prior use of HT.8

A 2011 presentation described a cohort study in which 1,299 BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts who had undergone salpingo-oophorectomy were followed for a mean of 5.4 years postoperatively. In this population, use of HT was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Among women with BRCA1 mutations, use of systemic HT was associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer.9

Viewed in aggregate, these studies reassure us that short-term use of systemic HT does not increase breast cancer risk in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and intact breasts.

 

 

Dr. Simon
Nevertheless, I think it is important to point out that a properly powered study to assess actual risk in this setting is not available in the literature.

When a patient refuses HT
Dr. Pinkerton
Some BRCA mutation carriers may refuse HT despite reassurance that it is safe. Nonhormonal therapies are not as effective at relieving severe menopausal symptoms. Almost all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) can be offered, although only low-dose paroxetine salt is approved for treatment of postmenopausal hot flashes.10,11 Gabapentin also has shown efficacy in relieving hot flashes.

For genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM; formerly known as vulvovaginal atrophy), lubricants and moisturizers may provide some benefit, but they don’t improve the vaginal superficial cells and, therefore, are not as effective as hormonal options. There is now a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) approved to treat GSM—ospemifene. However, in clinical trials, ospemifene has been shown to increase hot flashes, so it would not be a good option for our patient.12

Case: Continued
Christine follows up 3 months after initiating estrogen therapy (oral estradiol 2 mg daily). She reports significant improvement in her hot flashes, with improved sleep and fewer sleep disruptions. In addition, she feels that her “mental sharpness” has returned.

Dr. Pinkerton
What if this patient had an intact uterus? Then she would not be a candidate for estrogen-only therapy because she would need continued endometrial protection. Options then would include low-dose continuous or cyclic progestogen therapy, often starting with micronized progesterone, as the E3N Study suggested it has a less negative effect on the uterus.13 Or she could use a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system off label, as Ms. Jolie Pitt elected to do.

Another option would be combining estrogen with a SERM. The only estrogen/SERM combination currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is conjugated estrogen/bazedoxefine, which showed no increase in breast tenderness, breast density, or bleeding rates, compared with placebo, in multiple trials up to 5 years in duration.14

Case: Resolved
Christine says she would like to continue HT, although she still experiences dryness and discomfort when sexually active with her husband, despite use of a vaginal lubricant. A pelvic examination is consistent with early changes of GSM.15

You discuss GSM with Christine and suggest that she consider 1 of 2 strategies:

 

  • Switch from daily use of oral estradiol to the 3-month systemic 0.1-mg estradiol ring (Femring), which would address both her vasomotor symptoms and her GSM.
  • Continue oral estradiol and add low-dose vaginal estrogen (cream, tablets, or Estring 2 mg).

Christine chooses Option 2. When she returns 6 months later for her well-woman visit, she reports that all of her menopausal symptoms have resolved, and a pelvic examination no longer reveals changes of GSM.

 

Share your thoughts on this article! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

Case: Disabling vasomotor symptoms in a BRCA1 mutation carrier
Christine is a 39-year-old mother of 2 who underwent risk-reducing, minimally invasive bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with hysterectomy 4 months ago for a BRCA1 mutation (with benign findings on pathology). Eighteen months before that surgery, she had risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction (implants) and was advised by her surgeon that she no longer needs breast imaging.

Today she reports disabling hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, and painful sex. Her previous ObGyn, who performed the hysterectomy, was unwilling to prescribe hormone therapy (HT) due to safety concerns. Christine tried venlafaxine at 37 to 75 mg but noted little relief of her vasomotor symptoms.

In discussing her symptoms with you during this initial visit, Christine, a practicing accountant, also reveals that she does not feel as intellectually “sharp” as she did before her gynecologic surgery.

What can you offer for relief of her symptoms?

More BRCA mutation carriers are being identified and choosing to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and bilateral mastectomy. Accordingly, clinicians are likely to face more questions about the use of systemic HT in this population. Because mutation carriers may worry about the safety of HT, given their BRCA status, some may delay or avoid salpingo-oophorectomy—a surgery that not only reduces the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer by 80% but also decreases the risk of breast cancer by 48%.1

Surgically menopausal women in their 30s or 40s who are not treated with HT appear to have an elevated risk for dementia and Parkinsonism.2 In addition, vasomotor symptoms are often more severe, and the risks for osteoporosis and, likely, cardiovascular disease are elevated in women with early menopause who are not treated with HT. For these reasons, systemic HT is recommended for women with early menopause, and generally should be continued at least until the normal age of menopause unless specific contraindications are present.3

Because Christine not only has had risk-reducing gynecologic surgery but also risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, her current risk for breast cancer is very low whether or not she uses HT. Because she does not have a uterus, her symptoms can effectively and safely be treated with systemic estrogen-only therapy.

Among clinicians with special expertise in the management of BRCA mutation carriers, the use of systemic HT would be considered appropriate—and not controversial—in this setting.4

Angelina Jolie details her surgeries
In March 2015, 39-year-old Oscar-winning actress and filmmaker Angelina Jolie Pitt published an opinion piece in the New York Times detailing her recent laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy and initiation of HT.5 Ms. Jolie Pitt, who carries the BRCA1 mutation, lost her mother, grandmother, and aunt to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Two years earlier, Ms. Jolie Pitt made news by describing her decision to move ahead with risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy.

Following her risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, she initiated systemic HT using transdermal estradiol and off-label use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for endometrial protection.

Her courageous decision to publicly describe her surgery and subsequent initiation of systemic HT will likely encourage women with ominous family histories to seek out genetic counseling and testing. Her decision to “go public” regarding surgery should help mutation carriers without a history of cancer (known in the BRCA community as “previvors”) who have completed their families to move forward with risk-reducing gynecologic surgery and, when appropriate, use of systemic HT.6

The outlook for previvors with intact breasts
Three studies address the risk of breast cancer with use of systemic HT among previvors with intact breasts. A 2005 study followed a cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts, 155 of whom had undergone risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, for a mean of 3.6 years. Of these women, 60% and 7%, respectively, of those who had and had not undergone salpingo-oophorectomy used HT. The authors noted that bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy reduced the risk of breast cancer by some 60%, whether or not women used HT.7

A 2008 case-control study focused on 472 menopausal BRCA1 carriers, half of whom had been diagnosed with breast cancer (cases); the other half had not received this diagnosis (controls). A 43% reduction in the risk of breast cancer was associated with prior use of HT.8

A 2011 presentation described a cohort study in which 1,299 BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with intact breasts who had undergone salpingo-oophorectomy were followed for a mean of 5.4 years postoperatively. In this population, use of HT was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Among women with BRCA1 mutations, use of systemic HT was associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer.9

Viewed in aggregate, these studies reassure us that short-term use of systemic HT does not increase breast cancer risk in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and intact breasts.

 

 

Dr. Simon
Nevertheless, I think it is important to point out that a properly powered study to assess actual risk in this setting is not available in the literature.

When a patient refuses HT
Dr. Pinkerton
Some BRCA mutation carriers may refuse HT despite reassurance that it is safe. Nonhormonal therapies are not as effective at relieving severe menopausal symptoms. Almost all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) can be offered, although only low-dose paroxetine salt is approved for treatment of postmenopausal hot flashes.10,11 Gabapentin also has shown efficacy in relieving hot flashes.

For genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM; formerly known as vulvovaginal atrophy), lubricants and moisturizers may provide some benefit, but they don’t improve the vaginal superficial cells and, therefore, are not as effective as hormonal options. There is now a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) approved to treat GSM—ospemifene. However, in clinical trials, ospemifene has been shown to increase hot flashes, so it would not be a good option for our patient.12

Case: Continued
Christine follows up 3 months after initiating estrogen therapy (oral estradiol 2 mg daily). She reports significant improvement in her hot flashes, with improved sleep and fewer sleep disruptions. In addition, she feels that her “mental sharpness” has returned.

Dr. Pinkerton
What if this patient had an intact uterus? Then she would not be a candidate for estrogen-only therapy because she would need continued endometrial protection. Options then would include low-dose continuous or cyclic progestogen therapy, often starting with micronized progesterone, as the E3N Study suggested it has a less negative effect on the uterus.13 Or she could use a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system off label, as Ms. Jolie Pitt elected to do.

Another option would be combining estrogen with a SERM. The only estrogen/SERM combination currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is conjugated estrogen/bazedoxefine, which showed no increase in breast tenderness, breast density, or bleeding rates, compared with placebo, in multiple trials up to 5 years in duration.14

Case: Resolved
Christine says she would like to continue HT, although she still experiences dryness and discomfort when sexually active with her husband, despite use of a vaginal lubricant. A pelvic examination is consistent with early changes of GSM.15

You discuss GSM with Christine and suggest that she consider 1 of 2 strategies:

 

  • Switch from daily use of oral estradiol to the 3-month systemic 0.1-mg estradiol ring (Femring), which would address both her vasomotor symptoms and her GSM.
  • Continue oral estradiol and add low-dose vaginal estrogen (cream, tablets, or Estring 2 mg).

Christine chooses Option 2. When she returns 6 months later for her well-woman visit, she reports that all of her menopausal symptoms have resolved, and a pelvic examination no longer reveals changes of GSM.

 

Share your thoughts on this article! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Finch AP, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1547–1553.
2. Rocca WA, Bower JH, Maraganore DM, et al. Increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in women who underwent oophorectomy before menopause. Neurology. 2007;69(11):1074–1083.
3. North American Menopause Society. The 2012 hormone therapy position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2012;19(3):257–271.
4. Finch AP, Evans G, Narod SA. BRCA carriers, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and menopause: clinical management considerations and recommendations. Womens Health (Lond Engl). 2012;8(5):543–555.
5. Pitt AJ. Angelina Jolie Pitt: Diary of a Surgery. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/opinion/angelina-jolie-pitt-diary-of-a-surgery.html. Published March 24, 2015. Accessed July 9, 2015.
6. Holman L, Brandt A, Daniels M, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and prophylactic mastectomy among BRCA mutation “previvors.” Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127(1 suppl):S17.
7. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Wagner T, et al; PROSE Study Group. Effect of short-term hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk reduction after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(31):7804–7810.
8. Eisen A, Lubinski J, Gronwald J, et al; Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. Hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(19):1361–1367.
9. Domchek SM, Mitchell G, Lindeman GJ, et al. Challenges to the development of new agents for molecularly defined patient subsets: lessons from BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(32):4224–4226.
10. Krause MS, Nakajima ST. Hormonal and nonhormonal treatment of vasomotor symptoms. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015;42(1):163–179.
11. Simon JA, Portman DJ, Kaunitz AM, et al. Low-dose paroxetine 7.5 mg for menopausal vasomotor symptoms: two randomized controlled trials. Menopause. 2013;20(10):1027–1030.
12. Bachmann GA, Komi JO; Ospemifene Study Group. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
13. Fournier A, Fabre A, Mesrine S, Boutron-Ruault MC, Berrino F, Clavel-Chapelon F. Use of different postmenopausal hormone therapies and risk of histology- and hormone receptor–defined invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1260–1268.
14. Pinkerton JV, Pickar JH, Racketa J, Mirkin S. Bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens for menopausal symptom treatment and osteoporosis prevention. Climacteric. 2012;15(5):411–418.
15. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al; Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.

References


1. Finch AP, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1547–1553.
2. Rocca WA, Bower JH, Maraganore DM, et al. Increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in women who underwent oophorectomy before menopause. Neurology. 2007;69(11):1074–1083.
3. North American Menopause Society. The 2012 hormone therapy position statement of the North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2012;19(3):257–271.
4. Finch AP, Evans G, Narod SA. BRCA carriers, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and menopause: clinical management considerations and recommendations. Womens Health (Lond Engl). 2012;8(5):543–555.
5. Pitt AJ. Angelina Jolie Pitt: Diary of a Surgery. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/opinion/angelina-jolie-pitt-diary-of-a-surgery.html. Published March 24, 2015. Accessed July 9, 2015.
6. Holman L, Brandt A, Daniels M, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and prophylactic mastectomy among BRCA mutation “previvors.” Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127(1 suppl):S17.
7. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Wagner T, et al; PROSE Study Group. Effect of short-term hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk reduction after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(31):7804–7810.
8. Eisen A, Lubinski J, Gronwald J, et al; Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. Hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(19):1361–1367.
9. Domchek SM, Mitchell G, Lindeman GJ, et al. Challenges to the development of new agents for molecularly defined patient subsets: lessons from BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(32):4224–4226.
10. Krause MS, Nakajima ST. Hormonal and nonhormonal treatment of vasomotor symptoms. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015;42(1):163–179.
11. Simon JA, Portman DJ, Kaunitz AM, et al. Low-dose paroxetine 7.5 mg for menopausal vasomotor symptoms: two randomized controlled trials. Menopause. 2013;20(10):1027–1030.
12. Bachmann GA, Komi JO; Ospemifene Study Group. Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study. Menopause. 2010;17(3):480–486.
13. Fournier A, Fabre A, Mesrine S, Boutron-Ruault MC, Berrino F, Clavel-Chapelon F. Use of different postmenopausal hormone therapies and risk of histology- and hormone receptor–defined invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1260–1268.
14. Pinkerton JV, Pickar JH, Racketa J, Mirkin S. Bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens for menopausal symptom treatment and osteoporosis prevention. Climacteric. 2012;15(5):411–418.
15. Rahn DD, Carberry C, Sanses TV, et al; Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group. Vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(6):1147–1156.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
24–26
Page Number
24–26
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Is menopausal hormone therapy safe when your patient carries a BRCA mutation?
Display Headline
Is menopausal hormone therapy safe when your patient carries a BRCA mutation?
Legacy Keywords
Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, JoAnn V. Pinkerton MD, James A. Simon MD, menopause, hormone therapy, HT, patient carries a BRCA mutation, BRCA mutation, breast cancer, BRCA1, BRCA2, mutation carrier, intact breasts, risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, systemic hormone therapy, risk of breast cancer, vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, painful sex, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, peritoneal cancer, surgical menopause, dementia, Parkinsonism,
Angelina Jolie, previvors, systemic HT, nonhormonal therapy, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, SNRIs, paroxetine salt, gabapentin, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, selective estrogen receptor modulator, SERM, ospemifene, estrogen therapy, oral estradiol, endometrial protection, progestogen therapy, micronized progesterone,
Legacy Keywords
Andrew M. Kaunitz MD, JoAnn V. Pinkerton MD, James A. Simon MD, menopause, hormone therapy, HT, patient carries a BRCA mutation, BRCA mutation, breast cancer, BRCA1, BRCA2, mutation carrier, intact breasts, risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, systemic hormone therapy, risk of breast cancer, vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, insomnia, vaginal dryness, painful sex, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, peritoneal cancer, surgical menopause, dementia, Parkinsonism,
Angelina Jolie, previvors, systemic HT, nonhormonal therapy, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, SNRIs, paroxetine salt, gabapentin, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, GSM, vaginal lubricants, vaginal moisturizers, selective estrogen receptor modulator, SERM, ospemifene, estrogen therapy, oral estradiol, endometrial protection, progestogen therapy, micronized progesterone,
Sections
Inside the Article

    In This Article

 

  • Angelina Jolie describes her surgeries
  • Hormone therapy for previvors with intact breasts?
  • When a patient refuses hormone therapy
Article PDF Media

Does preoperative urodynamics improve outcomes for women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence?

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:06
Display Headline
Does preoperative urodynamics improve outcomes for women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence?

In their review, Rachaneni and Latthe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical outcomes in women investigated by urodynamics and women who had office evaluation only. Three RCTs met their a priori criteria of women with pure stress incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, with outcomes describing cure or improvement of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). There were no statistical differences in the risk ratios of subjective cure, objective cure, voiding dysfunction, or urinary urgency between the 2 groups. Rachaneni and Latthe appropriately concluded that: “In women undergoing primary surgery for SUI or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence without voiding difficulties, urodynamics does not improve outcomes—as long as the women undergo careful office evaluation.”

Thorough evaluation is critical
It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that the mere presence of symptoms of SUI is insufficient justification for surgery. Providers should demonstrate SUI during office evaluation before operating on someone without urodynamics. The addition of a full-bladder standing stress test usually is sufficient to demonstrate incontinence in women with bothersome SUI.

National professional societies agree on what is involved in office evaluation. In June 2014, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Urogynecologic Society published a joint committee opinion on evaluation of uncomplicated SUI in women before surgical treatment.1 The committee opinion states1:

The minimum evaluation before primary midurethral sling surgery in women with symptoms of SUI includes the following 6 steps: 1) history, 2) urinalysis, 3) physical examination, 4) demonstration of stress incontinence, 5) assessment of urethral mobility, and 6) measurement of postvoid residual urine volume.

Although the most recent Cochrane review found no evidence about urodynamic use in men, children, and people with neurologic disease and noted that large definitive trials are needed in which people are randomly allocated to urodynamics or not,2 most experts believe, and this review confirms, that the issue has been settled for preoperative urodynamics in women with uncomplicated SUI before surgery.

What this evidence means for practic
It is safe to proceed to surgery for SUI without urodynamic testing in women who meet all the following criteria: no previous surgery, no prolapse beyond the introitus, presence of predominant SUI complaints, demonstration of stress incontinence on cough stress testing, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra, and normal urinalysis.
— Charles W. Nager, MD


Share your thoughts!
 Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Committee Opinion No. 603: Evaluation of uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence in women before surgical treatment. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1403–1407.
2. Clement K, Lapitan M, Omar M, Glazener CM. Urodynamic studies for management of urinary incontinence in children and adults: a short version Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(5):407–412.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

expert commentary

Charles W. Nager, MD, Professor and Chair, Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California, San Diego.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
52,51
Legacy Keywords
Charles W. Nager MD, preoperative urodynamics, stress urinary incontinence, office evaluation, surgical outcomes, urodynamics, pure stress urinary incontinence, SUI, stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, voiding dysfunction, urinary urgency, full-bladder standing stress test, ACOG, American Urogynecologic Society, urinalysis, cough stress test, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

expert commentary

Charles W. Nager, MD, Professor and Chair, Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California, San Diego.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

expert commentary

Charles W. Nager, MD, Professor and Chair, Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California, San Diego.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

In their review, Rachaneni and Latthe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical outcomes in women investigated by urodynamics and women who had office evaluation only. Three RCTs met their a priori criteria of women with pure stress incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, with outcomes describing cure or improvement of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). There were no statistical differences in the risk ratios of subjective cure, objective cure, voiding dysfunction, or urinary urgency between the 2 groups. Rachaneni and Latthe appropriately concluded that: “In women undergoing primary surgery for SUI or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence without voiding difficulties, urodynamics does not improve outcomes—as long as the women undergo careful office evaluation.”

Thorough evaluation is critical
It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that the mere presence of symptoms of SUI is insufficient justification for surgery. Providers should demonstrate SUI during office evaluation before operating on someone without urodynamics. The addition of a full-bladder standing stress test usually is sufficient to demonstrate incontinence in women with bothersome SUI.

National professional societies agree on what is involved in office evaluation. In June 2014, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Urogynecologic Society published a joint committee opinion on evaluation of uncomplicated SUI in women before surgical treatment.1 The committee opinion states1:

The minimum evaluation before primary midurethral sling surgery in women with symptoms of SUI includes the following 6 steps: 1) history, 2) urinalysis, 3) physical examination, 4) demonstration of stress incontinence, 5) assessment of urethral mobility, and 6) measurement of postvoid residual urine volume.

Although the most recent Cochrane review found no evidence about urodynamic use in men, children, and people with neurologic disease and noted that large definitive trials are needed in which people are randomly allocated to urodynamics or not,2 most experts believe, and this review confirms, that the issue has been settled for preoperative urodynamics in women with uncomplicated SUI before surgery.

What this evidence means for practic
It is safe to proceed to surgery for SUI without urodynamic testing in women who meet all the following criteria: no previous surgery, no prolapse beyond the introitus, presence of predominant SUI complaints, demonstration of stress incontinence on cough stress testing, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra, and normal urinalysis.
— Charles W. Nager, MD


Share your thoughts!
 Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

In their review, Rachaneni and Latthe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical outcomes in women investigated by urodynamics and women who had office evaluation only. Three RCTs met their a priori criteria of women with pure stress incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, with outcomes describing cure or improvement of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). There were no statistical differences in the risk ratios of subjective cure, objective cure, voiding dysfunction, or urinary urgency between the 2 groups. Rachaneni and Latthe appropriately concluded that: “In women undergoing primary surgery for SUI or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence without voiding difficulties, urodynamics does not improve outcomes—as long as the women undergo careful office evaluation.”

Thorough evaluation is critical
It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that the mere presence of symptoms of SUI is insufficient justification for surgery. Providers should demonstrate SUI during office evaluation before operating on someone without urodynamics. The addition of a full-bladder standing stress test usually is sufficient to demonstrate incontinence in women with bothersome SUI.

National professional societies agree on what is involved in office evaluation. In June 2014, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Urogynecologic Society published a joint committee opinion on evaluation of uncomplicated SUI in women before surgical treatment.1 The committee opinion states1:

The minimum evaluation before primary midurethral sling surgery in women with symptoms of SUI includes the following 6 steps: 1) history, 2) urinalysis, 3) physical examination, 4) demonstration of stress incontinence, 5) assessment of urethral mobility, and 6) measurement of postvoid residual urine volume.

Although the most recent Cochrane review found no evidence about urodynamic use in men, children, and people with neurologic disease and noted that large definitive trials are needed in which people are randomly allocated to urodynamics or not,2 most experts believe, and this review confirms, that the issue has been settled for preoperative urodynamics in women with uncomplicated SUI before surgery.

What this evidence means for practic
It is safe to proceed to surgery for SUI without urodynamic testing in women who meet all the following criteria: no previous surgery, no prolapse beyond the introitus, presence of predominant SUI complaints, demonstration of stress incontinence on cough stress testing, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra, and normal urinalysis.
— Charles W. Nager, MD


Share your thoughts!
 Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.

References


1. Committee Opinion No. 603: Evaluation of uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence in women before surgical treatment. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1403–1407.
2. Clement K, Lapitan M, Omar M, Glazener CM. Urodynamic studies for management of urinary incontinence in children and adults: a short version Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(5):407–412.

References


1. Committee Opinion No. 603: Evaluation of uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence in women before surgical treatment. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1403–1407.
2. Clement K, Lapitan M, Omar M, Glazener CM. Urodynamic studies for management of urinary incontinence in children and adults: a short version Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(5):407–412.

Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Issue
OBG Management - 27(8)
Page Number
52,51
Page Number
52,51
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Does preoperative urodynamics improve outcomes for women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence?
Display Headline
Does preoperative urodynamics improve outcomes for women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence?
Legacy Keywords
Charles W. Nager MD, preoperative urodynamics, stress urinary incontinence, office evaluation, surgical outcomes, urodynamics, pure stress urinary incontinence, SUI, stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, voiding dysfunction, urinary urgency, full-bladder standing stress test, ACOG, American Urogynecologic Society, urinalysis, cough stress test, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra,
Legacy Keywords
Charles W. Nager MD, preoperative urodynamics, stress urinary incontinence, office evaluation, surgical outcomes, urodynamics, pure stress urinary incontinence, SUI, stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, voiding dysfunction, urinary urgency, full-bladder standing stress test, ACOG, American Urogynecologic Society, urinalysis, cough stress test, normal postvoid residual, mobile urethra,
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media