Dataset Information

The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse (VVP) has been investigated in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but a systematic review of the topic is still lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of treatments for VVP.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on the treatment of VVP found in PubMed and Embase. Reference lists of identified relevant articles were checked for additional articles. A network plot was constructed to illustrate the geometry of the network of the treatments included. Only RCTs reporting on the treatment of VVP were eligible, conditional on a minimum of 30 participants with VVP and a follow-up of at least 6 months.Nine RCTs reporting 846 women (ranging from 95 to 168 women) met the inclusion criteria. All surgical techniques were associated with good subjective results, and without differences between the compared technique, with the exception of the comparison of vaginal mesh (VM) vs laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). LSC is associated with a higher satisfaction rate. The anatomical results of the sacrocolpopexy (laparoscopic, robotic [RSC]. and abdominal [ASC]) are the best (62-91%), followed by the VM. However, the ranges of the anatomical outcome of VM were wide (43-97%). The poorest results are described for the sacrospinal fixation (SSF; 35-81%), which also correlates with the higher reoperation rate for pelvic organ prolapse (POP; 5-9%). The highest percentage of complications were reported after ASC (2-19%), VM (6-29%), and RSC (54%). Mesh exposure was seen most often after VM (8-21%). The rate of reoperations carried out because of complications, recurrence prolapse, and incontinence of VM was 13-22%. Overall, sacrocolpopexy reported the best results at follow-up, with an outlier of one trial reporting the highest reoperation rate for POP (11%). The results of the RSC are too small to make any conclusion, but LSC seems to be preferable to ASC.A comparison of techniques was difficult because of heterogeneity; therefore, a network meta-analysis was not possible. All techniques have proved to be effective. The reported differences between the techniques were negligible. Therefore, a standard treatment for VVP could not be given according to this review.

SUBMITTER: Coolen AWM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5705749 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Coolen Anne-Lotte W M AWM Bui Bich Ngoc BN Dietz Viviane V Wang Rui R van Montfoort Aafke P A APA Mol Ben Willem J BWJ Roovers Jan-Paul W R JWR Bongers Marlies Y MY

International urogynecology journal 20171016 12

<h4>Introduction and hypothesis</h4>The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse (VVP) has been investigated in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but a systematic review of the topic is still lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of treatments for VVP.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on the treatment of VVP found in PubMed and Embase. Reference lists of identified relevant articles were checked for ...[more]

PMID: 29038834

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceVaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension is commonly performed for uterovaginal prolapse. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy is an alternative option.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and adverse events of vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension and transvaginal mesh hysteropexy.Design, setting, participantsAt 9 clinical sites in the US Pelvic Floor Disorders Network, 183 postmenopausal women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse were enrolled in a randomized superiority clinical trial between April 2013 and February 2015. The study was designed for primary analysis when the last randomized participant reached 3 years of follow-up in February 2018.InterventionsNinety-three women were randomized to undergo vaginal mesh hysteropexy and 90 were randomized to undergo vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary treatment failure composite outcome (re-treatment of prolapse, prolapse beyond the hymen, or prolapse symptoms) was evaluated with survival models. Secondary outcomes included operative outcomes and adverse events, and were evaluated with longitudinal models or contingency tables as appropriate.ResultsA total of 183 participants (mean age, 66 years) were randomized, 175 were included in the trial, and 169 (97%) completed the 3-year follow-up. The primary outcome was not significantly different among women who underwent hysteropexy vs hysterectomy through 48 months (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.38-1.02]; P?=?.06; 36-month adjusted failure incidence, 26% vs 38%). Mean (SD) operative time was lower in the hysteropexy group vs the hysterectomy group (111.5 [39.7] min vs 156.7 [43.9] min; difference, -45.2 [95% CI, -57.7 to -32.7]; P?=?<.001). Adverse events in the hysteropexy vs hysterectomy groups included mesh exposure (8% vs 0%), ureteral kinking managed intraoperatively (0% vs 7%), granulation tissue after 12 weeks (1% vs 11%), and suture exposure after 12 weeks (3% vs 21%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse undergoing vaginal surgery, vaginal mesh hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension did not result in a significantly lower rate of the composite prolapse outcome after 3 years. However, imprecision in study results precludes a definitive conclusion, and further research is needed to assess whether vaginal mesh hysteropexy is more effective than vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01802281.

Project description:BackgroundHysterectomy is one of the most frequently gynecologic surgeries performed in premenopausal women. Many premenopausal patients are unwilling to undergo hysterectomy due to the probable decreased ovarian function. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of hysterectomy on ovarian function.MethodsA meta-analysis has been reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines. We mainly searched the Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases for eligible studies. The outcomes were the levels of common indicators of ovarian function, such as anti-müllerian hormone (AMH), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), inhibin B, estradiol (E2) and luteinizing hormone (LH). The evidence was synthesized using meta-analysis via fixed or random effect model according to heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine the potential sources of heterogeneity.ResultsThe 14 included studies were conducted between 1989 and 2021, involving a total of 1,457 premenopausal women with 760 and 697 in the hysterectomy and control group, respectively. We found that hysterectomy damage ovarian function compared to the control group, with lower AMH level [Weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.56, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -0.72 to -0.39, P = 0.000], higher FSH levels (WMD = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.47 to 4.44, P = 0.000), lower inhibin B levels (WMD = -14.34, 95% CI: -24.69 to -3.99, P = 0.000) and higher LH levels (WMD = 4.07, 95% CI: 1.78 to 6.37, P = 0.000). In addition, E2 levels have a decreasing trend (WMD = -17.13, 95% CI: -35.10 to 0.85, P = 0.631) in the hysterectomy group but were not statistically significant.ConclusionHysterectomy has a negative impact on ovarian function, especially in female patients over 40 years old. So, the older patients should closely monitor their ovarian function for early diagnosis and treatment of menopausal symptoms.

Dataset Information

The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

The treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets