Dataset Information

Clinical challenges in the management of vaginal prolapse.

ABSTRACT: Pelvic organ prolapse is highly prevalent, and negatively affects a woman's quality of life. Women with bothersome prolapse may be offered pessary management or may choose to undergo corrective surgery. In choosing the most appropriate surgical procedure, there are many factors to consider. These may include the location(s) of anatomic defects, the severity of prolapse symptoms, the activity level of the woman, and concerns regarding the durability of the repair. In many instances, women and their surgeons are challenged to weigh the risks and benefits of native tissue versus mesh-augmented repairs. Though mesh-augmented repairs may offer better durability, they are also associated with unique complications, such as mesh erosion. Furthermore, newer surgical techniques of mesh placement via abdominal or vaginal routes may result in different outcomes compared to traditional techniques. Biologic grafts may also be considered to improve durability of a surgical repair, while avoiding potential complications of synthetic mesh. In this article, we review many of the clinical challenges that gynecologic surgeons face in the surgical management of vaginal prolapse. Furthermore, we review data that can help guide decision making when treating women with pelvic organ prolapse.

SUBMITTER: Siddiqui NY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3897326 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical challenges in the management of vaginal prolapse.

Siddiqui Nazema Y NY Edenfield Autumn L AL

International journal of women's health 20140116

Pelvic organ prolapse is highly prevalent, and negatively affects a woman's quality of life. Women with bothersome prolapse may be offered pessary management or may choose to undergo corrective surgery. In choosing the most appropriate surgical procedure, there are many factors to consider. These may include the location(s) of anatomic defects, the severity of prolapse symptoms, the activity level of the woman, and concerns regarding the durability of the repair. In many instances, women and the ...[more]

PMID: 24474848

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSurgical repairs of apical/uterovaginal prolapse are commonly performed using native tissue pelvic ligaments as the point of attachment for the vaginal cuff after a hysterectomy. Clinicians may recommend vaginal estrogen in an effort to reduce prolapse recurrence, but the effects of intravaginal estrogen on surgical prolapse management are uncertain.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of perioperative vaginal estrogen vs placebo cream on prolapse recurrence following native tissue surgical prolapse repair.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized superiority clinical trial was conducted at 3 tertiary US clinical sites (Texas, Alabama, Rhode Island). Postmenopausal women (N = 206) with bothersome anterior and apical vaginal prolapse interested in surgical repair were enrolled in urogynecology clinics between December 2016 and February 2020.InterventionsThe intervention was 1 g of conjugated estrogen cream (0.625 mg/g) or placebo, inserted vaginally nightly for 2 weeks and then twice weekly to complete at least 5 weeks of application preoperatively; this continued twice weekly for 12 months postoperatively. Participants underwent a vaginal hysterectomy (if uterus present) and standardized apical fixation (either uterosacral or sacrospinous ligament fixation).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was time to failure of prolapse repair by 12 months after surgery defined by at least 1 of the following 3 outcomes: anatomical/objective prolapse of the anterior or posterior walls beyond the hymen or the apex descending more than one-third of the vaginal length, subjective vaginal bulge symptoms, or repeated prolapse treatment. Secondary outcomes included measures of urinary and sexual function, symptoms and signs of urogenital atrophy, and adverse events.ResultsOf 206 postmenopausal women, 199 were randomized and 186 underwent surgery. The mean (SD) age of participants was 65 (6.7) years. The primary outcome was not significantly different for women receiving vaginal estrogen vs placebo through 12 months: 12-month failure incidence of 19% (n = 20) for vaginal estrogen vs 9% (n = 10) for placebo (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.97 [95% CI, 0.92-4.22]), with the anatomic recurrence component being most common, rather than vaginal bulge symptoms or prolapse repeated treatment. Masked surgeon assessment of vaginal tissue quality and estrogenization was significantly better in the vaginal estrogen group at the time of the operation. In the subset of participants with at least moderately bothersome vaginal atrophy symptoms at baseline (n = 109), the vaginal atrophy score for most bothersome symptom was significantly better at 12 months with vaginal estrogen.Conclusions and relevanceAdjunctive perioperative vaginal estrogen application did not improve surgical success rates after native tissue transvaginal prolapse repair.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02431897.

Project description:BackgroundPelvic organ prolapse (or prolapse) is a common condition in women where the pelvic organs (bladder, bowel or womb) descend into the vagina and cause distressing symptoms that adversely affect quality of life. Many women will use a vaginal pessary to treat their prolapse symptoms. Clinic-based care usually consists of having a pessary fitted in a primary or secondary care setting, and returning approximately every 6 months for healthcare professional review and pessary change. However, it is possible that women could remove, clean and re-insert their pessary themselves; this is called self-management. This trial aims to assess if self-management of a vaginal pessary is associated with better quality of life for women with prolapse when compared to clinic-based care.MethodsThis is a multicentre randomised controlled trial in at least 17 UK centres. The intervention group will receive pessary self-management teaching, a self-management information leaflet, a follow-up phone call and access to a local telephone number for clinical support. The control group will receive the clinic-based pessary care which is standard at their centre. Demographic and medical history data will be collected from both groups at baseline. The primary outcome is condition-specific quality of life at 18 months' post-randomisation. Several secondary outcomes will also be assessed using participant-completed questionnaires. Questionnaires will be administered at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months' post-randomisation. An economic evaluation will be carried out alongside the trial to evaluate cost-effectiveness. A process evaluation will run parallel to the trial, the protocol for which is reported in a companion paper.DiscussionThe results of the trial will provide robust evidence of the effectiveness of pessary self-management compared to clinic-based care in terms of improving women's quality of life, and of its cost-effectiveness.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62510577 . Registered on June 10, 2017.

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:Women without stress urinary incontinence undergoing vaginal surgery for pelvic-organ prolapse are at risk for postoperative urinary incontinence. A midurethral sling may be placed at the time of prolapse repair to reduce this risk.We performed a multicenter trial involving women without symptoms of stress incontinence and with anterior prolapse (of stage 2 or higher on a Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system examination) who were planning to undergo vaginal prolapse surgery. Women were randomly assigned to receive either a midurethral sling or sham incisions during surgery. One primary end point was urinary incontinence or treatment for this condition at 3 months. The second primary end point was the presence of incontinence at 12 months, allowing for subsequent treatment for incontinence.Of the 337 women who underwent randomization, 327 (97%) completed follow-up at 1 year. At 3 months, the rate of urinary incontinence (or treatment) was 23.6% in the sling group and 49.4% in the sham group (P<0.001). At 12 months, urinary incontinence (allowing for subsequent treatment of incontinence) was present in 27.3% and 43.0% of patients in the sling and sham groups, respectively (P=0.002). The number needed to treat with a sling to prevent one case of urinary incontinence at 12 months was 6.3. The rate of bladder perforation was higher in the sling group than in the sham group (6.7% vs. 0%), as were rates of urinary tract infection (31.0% vs. 18.3%), major bleeding complications (3.1% vs. 0%), and incomplete bladder emptying 6 weeks after surgery (3.7% vs. 0%) (P?0.05 for all comparisons).A prophylactic midurethral sling inserted during vaginal prolapse surgery resulted in a lower rate of urinary incontinence at 3 and 12 months but higher rates of adverse events. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Institutes of Health Office of Research on Women's Health; OPUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00460434.).

Dataset Information

Clinical challenges in the management of vaginal prolapse.

Publications

Clinical challenges in the management of vaginal prolapse.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets