Abstract

ObjectiveIn recent years uterine preservation has become a popular option in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse repair. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of uterine volume on outcomes following uterine preserving surgical treatment for apical prolapse. MethodsWe performed a retrospective comparative study at a tertiary university hospital. Included were women who had uterine preserving surgical treatment for apical prolapse. The cohort was divided into two groups: 1) Patients with a uterine volume ≥ 35 cm3 (large uterus group); 2) Patients with uterine volume < 35 cm3 (small uterus group). Pre-, intra-, and post-operative data were compared between groups. Our primary outcome was composite outcome success including clinical and anatomical success and no need for reoperation. Secondary outcomes included clinical success, anatomical success, and patient satisfaction evaluated using the PGI-I questionnaire. ResultsEighty-four patients were included in the final analysis. The large uterus group (≥35 cm3) consisted of 37 patients as opposed to 47 in the small uterus group (<35 cm3). Clinical (91.9 % vs 87.1 %, p = 0.725) and anatomical success (84.8 % vs 90.9 %, p = 0.508) were high and did not differ between groups. Composite outcome success was 76.1 % in the small uterus group compared to 87.9 % in the large uterus group, but this difference was not statistically significant. Post-operative points Ba, C and Bp were similar between groups. No difference was found in patient satisfaction measured using the PGI-I questionnaire. ConclusionWomen undergoing uterine preserving apical prolapse repair with uterine volume ≥ 35 cm3 have comparable surgical outcomes to patients with a smaller uterus.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call