METHODS: This was a retrospective study of women with pelvic organ prolapse who underwent LSC from January 2013 to January 2016 in a tertiary center. Urinary function was clinically evaluated using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF), the Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire- - Short Form 20 (PFDI-20). Urodynamic assessment was performed before and 6 months after surgery. The Wilcoxon signed-ranks test and the McNemar test were applied with p pelvic organ prolapse, restoring both level 1 and level 2 support without detrimental effects on urinary function.
METHODS: We analysed data from 726 women with a mean age of 56 (SD 13.7, range 18-88) years, seen for symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction between August 2011 and April 2013. The examination included a standardised interview and clinical assessment of FPOP with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) measurements, Modified Oxford Scale (MOS) grading and 4D TLUS.
RESULTS: Symptoms of prolapse were reported in 51.4% (373 out of 726) with a mean bother score of 5.8 (SD 2.91, range 0-10). A clinically significant POP (Incontinence Society [ICS]-POP-Q stage ≥ 2) in any compartment was diagnosed in 77.1%. Mean MOS was 2.4 (SD 1.1, range 0-5). Significant POP on TLUS was seen in 54.6% (389 out of 712). TLUS volumes at rest and on maximal PFM contraction were analysed on a desktop PC, to assess the degree of bladder neck (BN) cranioventral shift and levator antero-posterior (AP) diameter reduction, blinded against other data. Mean cranioventral BN shift was 7.11 (SD 4.36, range 0.32-25.32) mm and mean levator AP diameter reduction was 8.6 (SD 4.8, range 0.3-31.3) mm. MOS was strongly associated with subjective and objective POP (P ≤ 0.001), whereas this was not true for TLUS measurements of tissue displacement.
CONCLUSION: The MOS seems to be a more valid measure of PFM function than sonographically determined BN displacement or reduction of hiatal AP diameter observed on PFM contraction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study, 139 women, underwent transvaginal surgery for anterior and/or apical POP > stage 2, 69 patients had SIM A and 70 patients had SSF. The objective cure was defined as POP ≤ stage 1 anterior, apical according to POP-Q. Subjective cure is patient's negative feedback to question 2 and 3 of pelvic organ prolapse distress inventory 6 (POPDI-6). Patient's satisfaction was reported using validated quality of life questionnaires. Multi-channel urodynamic study was used to report any voiding problems related to the prolapse surgery 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: 119 patients completed a minimum of 3 years follow-up. 89.8% is the overall prolapse correction success rate for SIM A and 73.3% for SSF group (p = 0.020), and 96.6% versus 73.4% at the anterior vaginal compartment respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Statistically significant difference was noticed in apical compartment with 98.3% with SIM A and 85.0% with SSF (p = 0.009). The subjective success rate, 86.4% in the SIM A and 70.0% in the SSF arm (p = 0.030) was significantly noted. Only, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) showed significant improvement. Operation time and intra-operative blood loss tend to be more with SIM A.
CONCLUSION: SIM A has better 3 years objective and subjective cure rate than SSF in the anterior and/or apical compartment prolapse.
METHODS: A retrospective observational study involving postmenopausal women with pelvic floor dysfunction attending a tertiary urogynecology center between January 2012 and March 2015. All underwent a clinical examination including International Continence Society Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification and 4D translabial ultrasound imaging. Information on current or former use of systemic HT and current local estrogen use was collected. Main outcome measure was pelvic organ support.
RESULTS: One thousand four hundred forty-three women were seen during the study period. On univariate analysis, current HT was significantly associated with sonographically determined descent of the rectal ampulla (β [95% confidence interval] 3.4 mm [0.4-6.5], P = 0.03) and Gh + Pb (-0.45 mm [-0.8 to -0.1], P = 0.005). Past HT use, duration of HT use, or current vaginal estrogen use was not associated with pelvic organ support. On multivariate analysis controlling for age, parity, body mass index, history of forceps delivery, and avulsion, the association between current HT on the one hand and Gh + Pb as well as increased descent of the rectal ampulla on ultrasound, remained significant (P = 0.008 and P = 0.012, respectively).
CONCLUSION: HT may have a minor negative effect on pelvic organ support; however, the effect is likely too small to be clinically relevant.