Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 7/2022

29.09.2021 | Original Article

Intermediate term outcomes after transvaginal uterine-preserving surgery in women with uterovaginal prolapse

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 7/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

There is growing interest in and performance of uterine-preserving prolapse repairs. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence 2 years following transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy (USLH) and sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy (SSLH).

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study with a cross-sectional survey of women who underwent transvaginal uterine-preserving POP surgery from May 2016 to December 2017. Patients were included if they underwent either USLH or SSLH. POP recurrence was defined as a composite of subjective symptoms and/or retreatment. A cross-sectional survey was used to assess pelvic floor symptoms and patient satisfaction.

Results

A total of 47 women met the criteria. Mean age was 52.8 ± 12.5 years, and all had a preoperative POP-Q stage of 2 (55.3%) or 3 (44.7%). Thirty (63.8%) underwent SSLH and 17 (36.2%) underwent USLH. There were no differences in patient characteristics or perioperative data. There was no difference in composite recurrence (26.7% [8] vs 23.5% [4]) and retreatment (6.7% [2] vs 0%) retrospectively between SSLH and USLH groups at 22.6 months. Survey response rate was 80.9% (38) with a response time of 30.7 (28.0–36.6) months. The majority of patients (84.2%) reported POP symptom improvement, and both groups reported great satisfaction (89.5%). In respondents, 13.2% (5) reported subjective recurrence and 5.3% (2) underwent retreatment, with no differences between hysteropexy types. There were no differences in other pelvic floor symptoms.

Conclusions

Although 1 in 4 women experienced subjective POP recurrence after transvaginal uterine-preserving prolapse repair and <5% underwent retreatment at 2 years, our results must be interpreted with caution given our small sample size. No differences in outcomes were identified between hysteropexy types; however, additional studies should be performed to confirm these findings. Both hysteropexy approaches were associated with great patient satisfaction.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Whiteman MK, Hillis SD, Jamieson DJ, et al. Inpatient hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 2000–2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(1):34.e1–7.CrossRef Whiteman MK, Hillis SD, Jamieson DJ, et al. Inpatient hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 2000–2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(1):34.e1–7.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2):233–41.CrossRef Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2):233–41.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Frick AC, Barber MD, Paraiso MFR, Ridgeway B, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD. Attitudes toward hysterectomy in women undergoing evaluation for Uterovaginal prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19(2):103–9.CrossRef Frick AC, Barber MD, Paraiso MFR, Ridgeway B, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD. Attitudes toward hysterectomy in women undergoing evaluation for Uterovaginal prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19(2):103–9.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Good MM, Korbly N, Kassis NC, et al. Prolapse-related knowledge and attitudes toward the uterus in women with pelvic organ prolapse symptoms. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):481.e1–6.CrossRef Good MM, Korbly N, Kassis NC, et al. Prolapse-related knowledge and attitudes toward the uterus in women with pelvic organ prolapse symptoms. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):481.e1–6.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Madsen AM, Raker C, Sung VW. Trends in hysteropexy and apical support for uterovaginal prolapse in the United States from 2002 to 2012. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(6):365–71.CrossRef Madsen AM, Raker C, Sung VW. Trends in hysteropexy and apical support for uterovaginal prolapse in the United States from 2002 to 2012. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(6):365–71.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Ridgeway BM, Cadish L. Hysteropexy. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60(2):312–23.CrossRef Ridgeway BM, Cadish L. Hysteropexy. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60(2):312–23.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Gutman R, Maher C. Uterine-preserving POP surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1803–13.CrossRef Gutman R, Maher C. Uterine-preserving POP surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1803–13.CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Maher CF, Cary MP, Slack MC, et al. Uterine preservation or hysterectomy at sacrospinous colpopexy for uterovaginal prolapse? Int Urogynecol J. 2001;12(6):381–4; discussion 384–5.CrossRef Maher CF, Cary MP, Slack MC, et al. Uterine preservation or hysterectomy at sacrospinous colpopexy for uterovaginal prolapse? Int Urogynecol J. 2001;12(6):381–4; discussion 384–5.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Dietz V, Huisman M, de Jong JM, et al. Functional outcome after sacrospinous hysteropexy for uterine descensus. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(6):747–52.CrossRef Dietz V, Huisman M, de Jong JM, et al. Functional outcome after sacrospinous hysteropexy for uterine descensus. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(6):747–52.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Dietz V, Van Der Vaart CH, Van Der Graaf Y, et al. One-year follow-up after sacrospinous hysteropexy and vaginal hysterectomy for uterine descent: a randomized study. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(2):209–16.CrossRef Dietz V, Van Der Vaart CH, Van Der Graaf Y, et al. One-year follow-up after sacrospinous hysteropexy and vaginal hysterectomy for uterine descent: a randomized study. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(2):209–16.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat van Brummen HJ, van de Pol G, Aalders CIM, et al. Sacrospinous hysteropexy compared to vaginal hysterectomy as primary surgical treatment for a descensus uteri: effects on urinary symptoms. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14(5):350–5; discussion 355.CrossRef van Brummen HJ, van de Pol G, Aalders CIM, et al. Sacrospinous hysteropexy compared to vaginal hysterectomy as primary surgical treatment for a descensus uteri: effects on urinary symptoms. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14(5):350–5; discussion 355.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Jeng C-J, Yang Y-C, Tzeng C-R, et al. Sexual functioning after vaginal hysterectomy or transvaginal sacrospinous uterine suspension for uterine prolapse: a comparison. J Reprod Med. 2005;50(9):669–74.PubMed Jeng C-J, Yang Y-C, Tzeng C-R, et al. Sexual functioning after vaginal hysterectomy or transvaginal sacrospinous uterine suspension for uterine prolapse: a comparison. J Reprod Med. 2005;50(9):669–74.PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Milani R, Manodoro S, Cola A, et al. Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy versus hysterectomy plus uterosacral ligament suspension: a matched cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;31(9):1867–72.CrossRef Milani R, Manodoro S, Cola A, et al. Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy versus hysterectomy plus uterosacral ligament suspension: a matched cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;31(9):1867–72.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Romanzi LJ, Tyagi R. Hysteropexy compared to hysterectomy for uterine prolapse surgery: does durability differ? Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(5):625–31.CrossRef Romanzi LJ, Tyagi R. Hysteropexy compared to hysterectomy for uterine prolapse surgery: does durability differ? Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(5):625–31.CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Milani R, Frigerio M, Manodoro S, et al. Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy: a retrospective feasibility study. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(1):73–6.CrossRef Milani R, Frigerio M, Manodoro S, et al. Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy: a retrospective feasibility study. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(1):73–6.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Aserlind A, Garcia AN, Medina CA. Uterus-sparingsurgery—outcomes of transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;28(1):100–6. Aserlind A, Garcia AN, Medina CA. Uterus-sparingsurgery—outcomes of transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;28(1):100–6.
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specificquality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):103–13.CrossRef Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specificquality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):103–13.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, et al. A short form of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14(3):164–8; discussion 168.CrossRef Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, et al. A short form of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14(3):164–8; discussion 168.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L. Validation of the patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(5):523–8.CrossRef Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L. Validation of the patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(5):523–8.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Sandvik H, Espuna M, Hunskaar S. Validity of the incontinence severity index: comparison with pad-weighing tests. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(5):520–4.CrossRef Sandvik H, Espuna M, Hunskaar S. Validity of the incontinence severity index: comparison with pad-weighing tests. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(5):520–4.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRef Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, et al. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):129–146.e2.CrossRef Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, et al. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):129–146.e2.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Meriwether KV, Balk EM, Antosh DD, et al. Uterine-preserving surgeries for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(4):505–22.CrossRef Meriwether KV, Balk EM, Antosh DD, et al. Uterine-preserving surgeries for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(4):505–22.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Korbly NB, Kassis NC, Good MM, et al. Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):470.e1–6.CrossRef Korbly NB, Kassis NC, Good MM, et al. Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):470.e1–6.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Wieslander CK, Roshanravan SM, Wai CY, Schaffer JI, Corton MM. Uterosacral ligament suspension sutures: anatomic relationships in unembalmed female cadavers. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):672.e1–6.CrossRef Wieslander CK, Roshanravan SM, Wai CY, Schaffer JI, Corton MM. Uterosacral ligament suspension sutures: anatomic relationships in unembalmed female cadavers. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):672.e1–6.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Hickman LC, Tran MC, Thomas TN, et al. Vaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy: technique and clinical outcomes. In: AUGS PFD Week. Chicago, Illinois; Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2018; 24(5S):S158. Hickman LC, Tran MC, Thomas TN, et al. Vaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy: technique and clinical outcomes. In: AUGS PFD Week. Chicago, Illinois; Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2018; 24(5S):S158.
Metadaten
Titel
Intermediate term outcomes after transvaginal uterine-preserving surgery in women with uterovaginal prolapse
Publikationsdatum
29.09.2021
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 7/2022
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04987-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2022

International Urogynecology Journal 7/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.