nach oben

International Urogynecology Journal

Erschienen in:

12.03.2018 | Original Article

The Manchester procedure: anatomical, subjective and sexual outcomes

verfasst von: Sissel Hegdahl Oversand, Anne C. Staff, Ellen Borstad, Rune Svenningsen

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 8/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Classical native-tissue techniques for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repairs, such as the Manchester procedure (MP), have been revitalized because of vaginal mesh complications. However, there are conflicting opinions regarding sufficient apical (mid-compartment) support by the MP and concerns about the risk of dyspareunia. The aims of this study were therefore to investigate anatomical and patient-reported outcomes 1 year after MP.

Methods

Prospective cohort study of 153 females undergoing an MP for anterior compartment POP between October 2014 and June 2016. Pre- and 1-year postoperative evaluations included POP-Q measurements and the questionnaires Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Short Form 20 (PFDI-20) and POP/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12).

Results

At 1 year, 97% (148/153) attended the follow-up. Significant anatomical improvements (p < 0.01) were obtained in all compartments. Mean Ba was −1.1 (± 1.4), mean C −5.9 (± 1.7) and mean D −7.0 (± 1.2) at follow-up. Point C ≤ −5 was present in 81.1%. POP-Q stage 0–1 was obtained in 99.3% in the mid-compartment (C < −1), but only in 48.6% in the anterior compartment (Ba < −1). A significant reduction in symptom scores was obtained for PFDI-20 (p < 0.01) and PISQ-12 (p = 0.01). No significant changes were seen in dyspareunia rates (q.5, PISQ-12), but 5.6% reported de novo dyspareunia. Concerning POP symptoms, 96.0% reported being cured or significantly improved.

Conclusions

The Manchester procedure provides adequate apical support, albeit inferior anatomical anterior compartment results, and 96.0% reported being subjectively cured or substantially better at 1-year follow-up, with no significant change in dyspareunia.

Hendrix SL, Clark A, Nygaard I, Aragaki A, Barnabei V, McTiernan A. Pelvic organ prolapse in the Women’s Health Initiative: gravity and gravidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(6):1160–6.CrossRefPubMed

Barber MD, Maher C. Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1783–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2169-9.CrossRefPubMed

White GR. Cystocele—a radical cure by suturing lateral sulci of vagina to white line of pelvic fascia. J Amer Med Assoc. 1909;53:1707–10.CrossRef

Haya N, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, de Tayrac R, Dietz V, Guldberg R, et al. Prolapse and continence surgery in countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 2012. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(6):755 e751–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.02.017.CrossRef

Eilber KS, Alperin M, Khan A, Wu N, Pashos CL, Clemens JQ, et al. Outcomes of vaginal prolapse surgery among female Medicare beneficiaries: the role of apical support. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(5):981–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a8a5e4.CrossRefPubMed

Zucchi A, Lazzeri M, Porena M, Mearini L, Costantini E. Uterus preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Nat Rev Urol. 2010;7(11):626–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2010.164.CrossRefPubMed

FDA. FDA strengthens requirements for surgical mesh for the transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse to address safety risks. 2016.

Debodinance P, Fatton B, Lucot JP. Should a hysterectomy be carried at the same time as surgery for a prolapse by vaginal route? Prog Urol. 2009;19(13):1060–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2009.09.022.CrossRefPubMed

Kalogirou D, Antoniou G, Karakitsos P, Kalogirou O. Comparison of surgical and postoperative complications of vaginal hysterectomy and Manchester procedure. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1996;17(4):278–80.PubMed

10.

Ulrich D, Dwyer P, Rosamilia A, Lim Y, Lee J. The effect of vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery on sexual function. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(4):316–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22569.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Oversand SH, Staff AC, Spydslaug AE, Svenningsen R, Borstad E. Long-term follow-up after native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(1):81–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2166-z.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Tolstrup CK, Lose G, Klarskov N. The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(1):33–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3100-y.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Dunivan GC, Lyons KE, Jeppson PC, Ninivaggio CS, Komesu YM, Alba FM, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse stage and the relationship to genital hiatus and perineal body measurements. Female Pelvic Med Re. 2016;22(6):497–500. https://doi.org/10.1097/Spv.0000000000000323.CrossRef

14.

Fothergill WE. A clinical lecture on the precise relationship of cystocele, prolapse and rectocelle, and the operations for their relief. Brit Med J. 1912;1912:817–8.CrossRef

15.

Haylen BT, Maher CF, Barber MD, Camargo S, Dandolu V, Digesu A, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Neurourol Urodyn. 2016; https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22922.

16.

Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):103–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, Khalsa S, Qualls C. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-003-1063-2.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Teig CJ, Grotle M, Bond MJ, Prinsen CA, Engh MA, Cvancarova MS, et al. Norwegian translation, and validation, of the pelvic floor distress inventory (PFDI-20) and the pelvic floor impact questionnaire (PFIQ-7). Int Urogynecol J. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3209-z.

19.

Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, Jakobsson U. Validation of the Swedish short forms of the pelvic floor impact questionnaire (PFIQ-7), pelvic floor distress inventory (PFDI-20) and pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Acta Obstet Gyn Scan. 2011;90(5):483–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01085.x.CrossRef

20.

Macin D, Campbell MJ, Say-Beng T, Sze-Huey T (2008) Sample size tables for clinical studies. 3rd edition edn. Wiley-Blackwell,

21.

Ünlübilgin ESAA, Ilhan TT, Dölen I. Which one is the appropriate approach for uterine prolapse: Manchester procedure or vaginal hysterectomy? Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci. 2013;33(2):321–5.CrossRef

22.

Miedel A, Tegerstedt G, Morlin B, Hammarstrom M. A 5-year prospective follow-up study of vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(12):1593–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0702-z.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Easley DC, Abramowitch SD, Moalli PA. Female pelvic floor biomechanics: bridging the gap. Curr Opin Urol. 2017;27(3):262–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/mou.0000000000000380.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Conger GT, Keettel WC. The Manchester-Fothergill operation, its place in gynecology; a review of 960 cases at university hospitals, Iowa City, Iowa. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1958;76(3):634–40.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Barber MD, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Wheeler TL 2nd, Schaffer J, Chen Z, et al. Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(3):600–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b2b1ae.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Barber MD, Maher C. Apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1815–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2172-1.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Dallenbach P. To mesh or not to mesh: a review of pelvic organ reconstructive surgery. Int J Women’s Health. 2015;7:331–43. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S71236.CrossRef

28.

Ayhan A, Esin S, Guven S, Salman C, Ozyuncu O. The Manchester operation for uterine prolapse. Int J Gynecol Obstet 92 (3):228-233. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.12.002.

29.

Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Lu YS, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2 Pt 1):233–41. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318299a6cf.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Altman D, Falconer C, Cnattingius S, Granath F. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery following hysterectomy on benign indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):572.e571–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.01.012.CrossRef

Titel: The Manchester procedure: anatomical, subjective and sexual outcomes
verfasst von: Sissel Hegdahl Oversand
Anne C. Staff
Ellen Borstad
Rune Svenningsen
Publikationsdatum: 12.03.2018
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 8/2018
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3622-6

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

23.04.2024 | Medikamente in Schwangerschaft und Stillzeit | Nachrichten

Update Gynäkologie

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

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

The Manchester procedure: anatomical, subjective and sexual outcomes

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Bei RSV-Impfung vor 60. Lebensjahr über Off-Label-Gebrauch aufklären!

Harnwegsinfektprophylaxe: Es geht auch ohne Antibiotika

Update Gynäkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2018

Role of sacral neuromodulation in modern urogynaecology practice: a review of recent literature

Open sacrocolpopexy and vaginal apical repair: retrospective comparison of success and serious complications

Quality of life following vaginal reconstructive versus obliterative surgery for treating advanced pelvic organ prolapse

How do patients and surgeons decide on uterine preservation or hysterectomy in apical prolapse?

Mechanical support of cardinal/uterosacral ligaments improves OAB symptoms: implications for management

Discontinuation rate and adverse events after 1 year of vaginal pessary use in women with pelvic organ prolapse

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Bei RSV-Impfung vor 60. Lebensjahr über Off-Label-Gebrauch aufklären!

Harnwegsinfektprophylaxe: Es geht auch ohne Antibiotika

Update Gynäkologie