Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 6/2018

04.09.2017 | Original Article

Putting POP-Q to the test: does C − D = cervical length?

verfasst von: Kathryn S. Williams, Lisa Rosen, Marjorie L. Pilkinton, Laura Dhariwal, Harvey A. Winkler

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 6/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We investigated the correlation between calculated cervical length (CCL) and gross specimen cervical length (GCL) after total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) at the time of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods

This was a retrospective chart review of patients who had undergone TVH with reconstructive surgery for POP between 2013 and 2015. Patients without an intact specimen or documented cervical length in the pathology report were excluded. CCL was defined as the absolute difference between Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) points C and D. GCL was obtained from the pathology report as the distance from the external to the internal os. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess the accuracy of POP-Q measurements with a priori ranges. Symptom severity was evaluated using the PFDI-20 questionnaire. Analysis of variance was used to model both GCL and CCL as a function of prolapse stage and the leading compartment.

Results

The final analysis included 202 subjects. Of the CCL measurements, 56.93% were within ±2 cm of GCL, while 36.14% were within ±1 cm. POP stage was significantly associated with GCL (P < 0.0024). CCL was significantly longer in patients with stage 4 POP (3.57 cm, 95% CI 3.13–4.00) than in those with stage 2 POP (P < 0.0017; mean 2.68 cm, 95% CI 2.45–2.92) and stage 3 POP (P < 0.0300; mean 2.94 cm, 95% CI 2.73–3.15). There were no significant correlations between PFDI scores and CCL or GCL.

Conclusions

The agreement between POP-Q CCL (|C − D|) and GCL decreases with increasing POP-Q stage. There was no correlation between POP symptom severity and GCL or CCL. GCL significantly increased with increasing POP stage.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMed Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Rogers RM, Richardson AC. Clinical evaluation of pelvic support defects with anatomic correlations. In: Bent AE, Ostergard DR, Cundiff GW, Swift SE, editors. Ostergard's urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2003. Rogers RM, Richardson AC. Clinical evaluation of pelvic support defects with anatomic correlations. In: Bent AE, Ostergard DR, Cundiff GW, Swift SE, editors. Ostergard's urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2003.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ibeanu OA, Chesson RR, Sandquist D, Perez J, Santiago K, Nolan TE. Hypertrophic cervical elongation: clinical and histological correlations. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:995–1000.CrossRefPubMed Ibeanu OA, Chesson RR, Sandquist D, Perez J, Santiago K, Nolan TE. Hypertrophic cervical elongation: clinical and histological correlations. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:995–1000.CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Dancz CE, Werth L, Sun V, Lee S, Walker D, Özel B. Comparison of the POP-Q examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and direct anatomic measurement of cervical length. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:457–64.CrossRefPubMed Dancz CE, Werth L, Sun V, Lee S, Walker D, Özel B. Comparison of the POP-Q examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and direct anatomic measurement of cervical length. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:457–64.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Geoffrion R, Louie K, Hyakutake MT, Koenig NA, Lee T, Filipenko JD. Study of prolapse-induced cervical elongation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2016;38(3):265–9.CrossRefPubMed Geoffrion R, Louie K, Hyakutake MT, Koenig NA, Lee T, Filipenko JD. Study of prolapse-induced cervical elongation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2016;38(3):265–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Persu C, Chapple CR, Cauni V, Gutue S, Geavlete P. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) – a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life. 2011;4(1):75–81.PubMedPubMedCentral Persu C, Chapple CR, Cauni V, Gutue S, Geavlete P. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) – a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life. 2011;4(1):75–81.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Boonstra H, Oosterhuis JW, Oosterhuis AM, Fleuren GJ. Cervical tissue shrinkage by formaldehyde fixation, paraffin wax embedding, section cutting and mounting. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1983;402(2):195–201.CrossRefPubMed Boonstra H, Oosterhuis JW, Oosterhuis AM, Fleuren GJ. Cervical tissue shrinkage by formaldehyde fixation, paraffin wax embedding, section cutting and mounting. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1983;402(2):195–201.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Mothes AR, Mothes H, Frober R, Radosa MP, Runnebaum IB. Systematic classification of uterine cervical elongation in patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;200:40–4.CrossRefPubMed Mothes AR, Mothes H, Frober R, Radosa MP, Runnebaum IB. Systematic classification of uterine cervical elongation in patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;200:40–4.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Vierhout ME, Stoutjesdijk J, Spruijt J. A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of patients undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. Int Urogynecol J. 2005;17:46–9.CrossRef Vierhout ME, Stoutjesdijk J, Spruijt J. A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of patients undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. Int Urogynecol J. 2005;17:46–9.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Teleman P, Laurikainen E, Kinne I, Pogosean R, Jakobsson U, Rudnicki M. Relationship between the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) before and after anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:195–200.CrossRefPubMed Teleman P, Laurikainen E, Kinne I, Pogosean R, Jakobsson U, Rudnicki M. Relationship between the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) before and after anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:195–200.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Finamore PS, Goldstein HB, Vakili B. Comparison of estimated cervical length from the pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam and actual cervical length at hysterectomy: can we accurately determine cervical elongation? J Pelvic Med Surg. 2009;15:17–9.CrossRef Finamore PS, Goldstein HB, Vakili B. Comparison of estimated cervical length from the pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam and actual cervical length at hysterectomy: can we accurately determine cervical elongation? J Pelvic Med Surg. 2009;15:17–9.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Putting POP-Q to the test: does C − D = cervical length?
verfasst von
Kathryn S. Williams
Lisa Rosen
Marjorie L. Pilkinton
Laura Dhariwal
Harvey A. Winkler
Publikationsdatum
04.09.2017
Verlag
Springer London
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 6/2018
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3464-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2018

International Urogynecology Journal 6/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

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