1869 PROLAPSE FOLLOW-UP AT 5 YEARS OR MORE: MYTH OR REALITY?

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Incontinence/Female Urology: Female Urology1 Apr 20111869 PROLAPSE FOLLOW-UP AT 5 YEARS OR MORE: MYTH OR REALITY? Rubiao Ou, Xian-Jin Xie, and Philippe Zimmern Rubiao OuRubiao Ou Guangzhou, China, People's Republic of More articles by this author , Xian-Jin XieXian-Jin Xie Dallas, TX More articles by this author , and Philippe ZimmernPhilippe Zimmern Dallas, TX More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.1951AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES To study the lost to follow-up (LTF) rate in level I/II evidence- based studies related to the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS Randomized clinical trials (level I) or non-randomized but prospective studies (level II) related to the surgical treatment of POP from January 1995 to November 2010 were searched on PUBMED. Data reviewed included types of study, number of participating centers or hospitals, sample size calculation, surgical techniques, power calculation, estimated dropout rate, duration of follow-up, rate and reasons for LTF. RESULTS 48 articles (4776 women) -22 randomized clinical trials (RCT) and 26 non-randomized prospective studies- met the inclusion criteria. 21 articles gave details on sample size calculation, and only 5 explained their LTF rate after reaching LTF patients by mail or telephone. Percentages of LTF patients were 9.8% (255/2609) at ≤ 12 months in 26 articles, 15% (184/1232) at 24 months in 12 articles, 27% (114/420) at 36 months in 8 articles, 44% (272/615) at 60 months in 4 articles and 60% (273/456) at > 60 months in 3 articles. When only RCT (ie level I) studies were examined (N=22), the LTF rate trended up to 20% at 3 years, with no such studies extending out further. Among the more recent RCT studies (< 10 years) (N=18), the longest follow-up was ≤ 2 years with a low LTF rate (figure). Fifteen articles reported no missing data mostly because of small sample size or short follow-up. Only 3 articles defined LTF patients as treatment failure or successes and reported outcomes accordingly. CONCLUSIONS Based on this contemporary review of the literature on POP, we found an acceptable attrition rate (10–20%) in studies with 2–3 year follow-up time, but a much larger rate in studies extending 3–5 years out. Meaningful long-term follow-up reporting at 5 years, as usually recommended after POP repair, may be unrealistic. © 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 185Issue 4SApril 2011Page: e750 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Rubiao Ou Guangzhou, China, People's Republic of More articles by this author Xian-Jin Xie Dallas, TX More articles by this author Philippe Zimmern Dallas, TX More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...