Vaginal Repair Of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Research Articles

Pelvic floor reconstruction-update 2024: prolapse-associated symptoms and their treatment

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and associated symptoms of urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, obstructive micturition, defecation, and pain are frequent and awidespread disease with relevant reduction of quality of life and high costs. New insights into functional anatomy and pathophysiology of these pelvic floor dysfunctions let us recognize how ligamentous laxities/defects lead to these dysfunctions. Results of the PROpel study (ClinicalTrials.gov-Identifier: NCT00638235) are shown in which adetailed observation of symptoms (patient-related outcome measures) pre- and postoperatively was performed. Ligamentous vaginal repair of POP enables symptom cure in high percentages for urinary urge incontinence (up to 82%), nocturia (up to 92%), obstructive micturition (up to 87%), fecal incontinence (58-72%), obstructive defecation (71-84%), and pain (53-90%), if caused by POP. Women with POP‑Q stage2 have similar symptom frequencies as women with POP‑Q stage3-4, and also similar cure rates of their symptoms. If good anatomical prolapse repair (in responders) was achieved, the cure rates for obstructive micturition, urinary urgency incontinence, and nocturia were significantly higher than in those women with less effective surgical repair. In the future, pelvic floor surgery should have symptom cure as the primary objective and should lead to improved quality of life. The different, currently performed techniques for POP repair have to be investigated concerning this matter.

Differences in Surgical Practice Patterns of Vaginal Native Tissue Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Between Urologists and Gynecologists.

Surgeon specialty training may influence the combination of transvaginal procedures for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. Isolated transvaginal anterior compartment repair (AR) without concurrent apical suspension (ApS) is a known risk factor for POP recurrence. Our primary aim was to compare the prevalence of isolated AR between urologists versus gynecologists. Our secondary aim was to compare associated postoperative complications. We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program for vaginal POP repair procedures (Current Procedural Terminology codes 57240, 57260, 57265, 57268, 57282, 57283) over a 5-year period by designated surgical specialty. We analyzed the relationships between specialty, vaginal repair type, operative details, and 30-day postoperative complications. Between January 2015 and December 2019, we included 16,093 women who underwent transvaginal POP repair, 90% performed by gynecologists and 10% by urologists. Urologists were more likely to perform an isolated AR without concurrent ApS (56% vs 47%, P < 0.0001). Gynecologists performed more isolated ApS (11% vs 9%) and combined AR with ApS (43% vs 35%, P < 0.0001). Overall, concurrent urethral sling placement was performed in 27% of cases, regardless of POP repair type, with no difference between specialties (P > 0.05). There were no differences in 30-day reoperations, readmissions, surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, or hospital stay lengths between specialties (P > 0.05). Urologists perform a minority of vaginal POP repairs and were more likely to perform isolated AR than gynecologists. The absence of concurrent ApS may increase the likelihood of prolapse recurrence. Immediate complication rates for each procedure did not differ.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: Predictors of high risk in a low-risk population.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates in vaginal pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair are low. Our aim is to evaluate specific risk factors for VTE in patients undergoing vaginal POP repair. This is a cross-sectional study using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP database. Using CPT codes, cases of vaginal POP repair between 2014 and 2017 were identified. Patient and operative characteristics were collected. VTE was defined as pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) within 30 days from surgery. Univariate analyses were performed using the Student ttest for continuous and χ2 tests for categorical variables. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with VTE. Of 44 207 women who underwent vaginal POP repair, there were 69 cases of VTE (0.16%). VTE rates for obliterative (0.15%) and functional (0.16%) vaginal POP repair, as well as for repairs with hysterectomy (0.17%) and without hysterectomy (0.12%) were not significantly different (p = .616 and.216, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated predictors for postoperative VTE to be ASA physical status classification ≥ 3 (aOR, 1.99; p = .014), length of stay >75th percentile (aOR, 2.01; p = .007), operative time >3 h(aOR, 2.24; p = .007), and dyspnea (aOR, 3.26, p = .004). Despite the low incidence of VTE after vaginal POP repair, patients with ASA physical status classification ≥ 3, length of stay>75th percentile, operative time>3 h, and dyspnea were at higher risk for VTE. Vaginal POP repair may have independent VTE risk factors not captured in standard risk assessment tools.

Incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism events after different routes of pelvic organ prolapse repairs

Venous thromboembolism events, including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are the most common cause of preventable deaths in hospitalized patients in the United States. Although the risk of venous thromboembolism events in benign gynecologic surgery is generally low, the potential for venous thromboembolism events in urogynecologic population is significant because most patients undergoing the pelvic organ prolapse surgery have increased surgical risk factors. This study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism events within 30 days after different routes of the pelvic organ prolapse surgery in a large cohort population using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. This retrospective cohort study used Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify pelvic organ prolapse repairs with and without concurrent hysterectomy performed during 2011-2017 in the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Demographics, preoperative length of hospital stay, operative time, preoperative comorbidities, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification system scores, along with other variables were collected. Postoperative 30-day complications, including readmission, reoperation, and mortality, were collected. The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism, as defined by American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, were compared among different surgical routes. Descriptive statistics were used, and logistic regression was performed to identify associations. Among 91,480 pelvic organ prolapse surgeries identified, 63,108 were analyzed: 43,279 (68.6%) were performed vaginally, 16,518 (26.2%) laparoscopically, and 3311 (5.2%) abdominally. A total of 34,698 (55.0%) underwent a concurrent hysterectomy. Of 63,108 subjects, 133 developed venous thromboembolism within 30 days after surgery (0.21%; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.25; P<.0001). More than half (60%) of venous thromboembolism events occurred within 10 days after surgery. For all surgical routes, older age (P<.041), higher body mass index (P=.002), race or ethnicity (P=.04), longer operating time (P<.0001), inpatient status (P<.0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists 3 or 4 (P<.0001), having preoperative renal failure (P=.001), and chronic steroid use (P=.02) were significantly associated with venous thromboembolism. In addition, in the vaginal pelvic organ prolapse repair group, concurrent hysterectomy (P=.03) and preoperative dyspnea (P=.01) were associated with development of venous thromboembolism. In the abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair, concurrent hysterectomy (P=.005) and hypertension requiring medication (P=.04) were also independently associated with venous thromboembolism development (Table1). The incidence of venous thromboembolism was highest in abdominal repairs (0.72%), followed by laparoscopic repairs (0.25%) and vaginal repairs (0.16%). After adjusting for confounders, abdominal compared with vaginal approach (adjusted odds ratio, 3.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-5.41; P<.0001), longer operative time (adjusted odds ratio, 1.005; 95% confidence interval, 1.003-1.006; P<.0001), older age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.020; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.037; P=.015), greater body mass index (adjusted odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.07; P=.0006), American Society of Anesthesiologists 3 or 4 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.31; P=.03), and preoperative renal failure (adjusted odds ratio, 8.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-44.15; P=.04) remained significantly associated with developing venous thromboembolism. Neither laparoscopic repair (compared with vaginal repair) nor concurrent procedures (hysterectomy, antiincontinence procedure, vaginal mesh insertion) were found to be significantly associated with the development of venous thromboembolism. The abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repairs were associated with an increased hazard of venous thromboembolism (hazard ratio, 3.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.96-5.45; P<.0001). Venous thromboembolism development was associated with 30-day mortality, readmission, and reoperation (all P<.0001). The overall incidence of venous thromboembolism after pelvic organ prolapse repairs based on a recent, large cohort database was very low, confirming the finding in previous smaller cohort studies. The highest venous thromboembolism risk was associated with abdominal route, and more than 60% of venous thromboembolism events occurred within 10 days after surgery. Thus, focus should be placed on risk-reducing strategies in the immediate postoperative period, with greater emphasis on patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Surgery for women with pelvic organ prolapse with or without stress urinary incontinence.

Surgery for women with pelvic organ prolapse with or without stress urinary incontinence.

MP33-18 IS MESH EVER APPROPRIATE FOR USE IN VAGINAL PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE REPAIR? A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS OF 110,329 WOMEN

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Female Pelvic Medicine: Pelvic Prolapse1 Apr 2018MP33-18 IS MESH EVER APPROPRIATE FOR USE IN VAGINAL PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE REPAIR? A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS OF 110,329 WOMEN Kai Dallas, Lisa Rogo-Gupta, Katherine Choi, and Christopher Elliot Kai DallasKai Dallas More articles by this author , Lisa Rogo-GuptaLisa Rogo-Gupta More articles by this author , Katherine ChoiKatherine Choi More articles by this author , and Christopher ElliotChristopher Elliot More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.1089AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES It is not entirely clear why synthetic mesh is associated with more problems than native tissue vaginal pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery. Several contributing factors are hypothesized to impact the risks associated with mesh-augmented POP repair including, 1) characteristics of the material itself, 2) surgical experience, and 3) patient selection. We present a large population-based approach to describe an ideal mesh usage strategy in which the risk of reoperation for POP is weighed against the risk of reoperation for complications. METHODS We assessed data from the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to identify all women undergoing POP repair in California from 2005-2011. Cases were identified utilizing ICD-9 and CPT procedure codes. Multivariate mixed effects logistic regression models were constructed to explore which patient, surgical and facility factors were associated with repeat surgery for a complication due to mesh or POP recurrence. RESULTS Of the 110,329 women who underwent POP repair, mesh augmentation was performed in 16.2%. Although the overall repeat surgery rate was higher in women undergoing mesh repairs compared to non-mesh repairs (5.4% vs 4.3%, p<0.001), multivariate modeling revealed mesh was not independently associated with repeat surgery. In addition, no particular facility mesh expertise (academic, high-mesh volume or high proportion of repairs utilizing mesh) was significantly associated with outcome. Rather, the factor driving the increase was having a repair at a facility with a greater propensity to perform mesh repairs (OR=1.55 in the highest quartile proportion of mesh use, as compared to the lowest, p<0.01). Predicted probability plots revealed the lowest repeat surgery rates occur when placing mesh in approximately 5% of anterior repairs and 10% of anterior-apical repairs (Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS Mesh itself, nor expertise in placement does not appear to overtly affect outcomes after POP repair. Our results suggest that judicious use likely balances the risks of mesh related complications against that of recurrent POP surgery. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e435 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Kai Dallas More articles by this author Lisa Rogo-Gupta More articles by this author Katherine Choi More articles by this author Christopher Elliot More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Estimating the Early Impact of the FDA Safety Communication on the Use of Surgical Mesh

To estimate the early impact of the July 2011 Food and Drug Administration Safety Communication on the practice patterns of gynecologic surgeons using surgical mesh to manage pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). A cross-sectional study was performed by administering a mesh usage questionnaire to physician attendees at the opening session of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology in November 2011. Of the 827 physicians attending the opening session of the conference, 281 (34%) completed the questionnaire, 202 (72%) of whom reported performing surgery for POP and/or SUI. The respondents were attending physicians (83.4%) with at least 10 years of experience (65.7%), 136 (71.1%) identifying themselves as General Gynecology, 29 (17.3%) as Urogynecology, 13 (7.1%) as Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, and 3 (1.8%) as Urology. When compared with generalists, specialists were more likely to use mesh for abdominal (86% vs 56.3%, P < 0.001) and vaginal (65.9% vs 37.2%, P = 0.001) POP repair. Specialists reported using mesh for the anterior compartment (50% vs 28.3%, P = 0.01) and the posterior compartment (36.4% vs 12.5%, P = 0.001), and total vaginal mesh kits (13.6% vs 1.7%, P = 0.005). Respondents reported an increase in mesh use for primary abdominal POP repair (82 vs 92, P = 0.013) and a decrease in mesh use for recurrent vaginal POP repair (99 vs 75, P < 0.001), with more surgeons opting against mesh for recurrent POP (49 vs 74, P < 0.001). For patient counseling, 53.7% reported changing their methods. In a self-selected sample of pelvic surgeons, we noted that the 2011 FDA Safety Communication had an impact, with changes in mesh usage and counseling patterns.

Perioperative Complications in Vaginal Mesh Procedures Using Trocar in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair

This study aimed to document intraoperative and early postoperative complications associated with the use of vaginal mesh with trocar in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. This is a retrospective review of 120 cases of vaginal repair of POP using vaginal mesh. Of the 120 patients, 31 underwent anterior mesh repair (Light mesh 10, Avaulta 1, Perigee 1, and Prolift 19); 35 underwent posterior mesh repair (Light mesh 2, Posterior IVS 17, and Prolift 16); and 54 underwent anterior and posterior mesh (total) repair (Light mesh 8, Prolift 32, and Prolift M 14). Three bladder injuries (2.5%) and one distal rectal injury (0.8%) occurred during dissection. Three of four organ injuries (75%) had previous prolapse repair. Overall four patients (3%) required transfusion. Urinary retention exceeding 5days occurred in four patients. Three of them (60%) also underwent TVT-O. Groin pain occurred in two patients one of whom underwent TVT-O. Gluteal pain occurred in one patient. Early mesh exposure occurred in the vaginal cuff of a patient who underwent hysterectomy. The vaginal mesh procedures may be done with relatively few perioperative complications. However, there is a need for more randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up to clarify its postoperative long-term complications and morbidities.

De novo stress urinary incontinence after vaginal repair for pelvic organ prolapse: one-year follow-up

ObjectiveA few studies have reported a wide range (2–43%) in incidence of de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in previously continent women. The aim of this study was to re-examine this incidence up to one year following vaginal repair of prolapse. Study designRetrospective review of a cohort of women who underwent reconstructive vaginal repair of POP without a concomitant anti-incontinence procedure between 2003 and 2007 at two tertiary referral centers. Women were considered eligible if they were stress continent by symptoms and objective assessment (including urodynamics testing) prior to surgical repair. All women who had had any anti-incontinence procedure previously were excluded. The endpoint was subjective SUI that prompted the patient to undergo any treatment within one year from their prolapse surgery. Results64 women, with a mean age of 61 (±11) years, were eligible for the study: 26 (41%) had preoperative symptoms of overactive bladder. Fifty-four patients were available for analysis at the one-year visit. Seven women (13.5%) had symptoms of SUI but only one (2%) was found to have SUI objectively. Another patient underwent anti-incontinence surgery following her prolapse surgery. ConclusionThe incidence of de novo SUI requiring treatment in previously continent women who underwent vaginal repairs for POP without concomitant anti-incontinence surgery is low (4%). A large-scale prospective study is necessary to further evaluate this finding.

Where to for pelvic organ prolapse treatment after the FDA pronouncements?

With the publication of the updated US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communication in 2011 on the use of transvaginal placement of mesh for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) it is appropriate to now review recent studies of good quality on POP to assess the safety and effectiveness of treatment options and determine their place in management. A systematic search for studies on the conservative and surgical management of POP published in the English literature between January 2002 and October 2012 was performed. Studies included were review articles, randomized controlled trials, prospective and relevant retrospective studies as well as conference abstracts. Selected articles were appraised by the authors regarding clinical relevance. Prospective comparative studies show that vaginal pessaries constitute an effective and safe treatment for POP and should be offered as first treatment of choice in women with symptomatic POP. However, a pessary will have to be used for the patient's lifetime. Abdominal sacral colpopexy is effective in treating apical prolapse with an acceptable benefit-risk ratio. This procedure should be balanced against the low but non-negligible risk of serious complications. The results of native tissue vaginal POP repair are better than previously thought with high patient satisfaction and acceptable reoperation rates. The insertion of mesh at the time of anterior vaginal wall repair reduces the awareness of prolapse as well as the risk of recurrent anterior prolapse. There is no difference in anatomic and subjective outcome when native tissue vaginal repairs are compared with multicompartment vaginal mesh. Mesh exposure is still a significant problem requiring surgical excision in approximately ≥ 10 % of cases. The ideal mesh has not yet been found necessitating more basic research into mesh properties and host response. Several studies indicate that greater surgical experience is correlated with fewer mesh complications. In women with uterovaginal prolapse uterine preservation is a feasible option which women should be offered. Randomized studies with long-term follow-up are advisable to establish the place of uterine preservation in POP surgery. Over the last decade treatment of POP has been dominated by the use of mesh. Conservative treatment is the first option in women with POP. Surgical repair with or without mesh generally results in good short-term objective and functional outcomes. However, basic research into mesh properties with host response and comparative studies with long-term follow-up are urgently needed.

Trocarless system for mesh attachment in pelvic organ prolapse repair—1-year evaluation

EndoFast Reliant system is a novel technology for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair that attaches mesh directly with metal fasteners. This was a prospective multicenter study in 20 women who underwent vaginal POP repair to evaluate safety and efficacy. The patients were followed for 12 months, using POP-Q measures, questionnaires on symptoms (PFDI), and sexual function (FSFI). No intraoperative complications occurred. Prolapse has been anatomically resolved (< stage 2) in 85% at 1-year follow-up (17/20 patients). Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) scores showed significant improvement for 1 year in symptoms related to prolapse (4.1-0.7, p < 0.001) and bladder (1.4-0.7, p = 0.06) but not to rectum. Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores did not change significantly. One case of mesh exposure was found (5%) and treated conservatively. No migration of fasteners was observed on X-ray. The EndoFast Reliant system was found safe and efficacious. Future studies are needed to evaluate its advantages over techniques using trocars.