Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports
Erschienen in: Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports 3/2012

01.09.2012 | Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Trends in Care Delivery for Disorders of the Female Pelvic Floor

verfasst von: W. Stuart Reynolds, David Penson, Roger R. Dmochowski

Erschienen in: Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports | Ausgabe 3/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Delivery of care for disorders of the female pelvic floor has changed significantly over the past two decades as the prevalence of the urinary incontinence and pelvic prolapse has increased and many new surgical techniques and devices have become available to the pelvic surgeon. The trend for surgical management of both stress incontinence and prolapse has been toward less invasive and morbid procedures that can be performed in outpatient settings. Unfortunately, early adoption of new technology can outpace clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of certain devices. Recent actions by the US Food and Drug Administration regarding synthetic pelvic mesh reflect some of the controversy surrounding these newer technologies and highlight some of the major trends in patterns of care delivery.
Literatur
1.
Milsom I, Altman D, Lapitan MC, et al. Epidemiology of Urinary (UI) and Fecal (FI) Incontinence and Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP). In: Abrams P et al., editors. Incontinence: 4th International Consultation on Incontinence. Paris, France: Health Publications Ltd; 2009. p. 35–112.
2.
Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1311–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
• Markland AD, Richter HE, Fwu CW, et al. Prevalence and trends of urinary incontinence in adults in the United States, 2001 to 2008. J Urol. 2011; 186(2): p. 589-93. This study highlights the recent changes in prevalence of UI in a generalizable population of US individuals.
4.
Reynolds WS, Dmochowski RR, Penson DF. Epidemiology of stress urinary incontinence in women. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12(5):370–6.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Dooley Y, Kenton K, Cao G, et al. Urinary incontinence prevalence: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J Urol. 2008;179(2):656–61.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Tennstedt SL, Link CL, Steers WD, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for urine leakage in a racially and ethnically diverse population of adults: the Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167(4):390–9.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Thompson CL, et al. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in the USA, the UK and Sweden: results from the Epidemiology of LUTS (EpiLUTS) study. BJU Int. 2009;104(3):352–60.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Sung VW, Raker CA, Myers DL, et al. Ambulatory care related to female pelvic floor disorders in the United States, 1995-2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 201(5):508 e1-6.
9.
Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. Women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(6):1278–83.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Handa VL, Garrett E, Hendrix S, et al. Progression and remission of pelvic organ prolapse: a longitudinal study of menopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(1):27–32.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Hendrix SL, Clark A, Nygaard I, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse in the Women's Health Initiative: gravity and gravidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(6):1160–6.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Nygaard I, Bradley C, Brandt D. Pelvic organ prolapse in older women: prevalence and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(3):489–97.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Bradley CS, Zimmerman MB, Qi Y, et al. Natural history of pelvic organ prolapse in postmenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(4):848–54.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Fialkow MF, Newton KM, Lentz GM, et al. Lifetime risk of surgical management for pelvic organ prolapse or urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(3):437–40.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF, et al. Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205(3): 230 e1-5.
17.
Anger JT, Weinberg AE, Albo ME, et al. Trends in surgical management of stress urinary incontinence among female Medicare beneficiaries. Urology. 2009;74(2):283–7.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Oliphant SS, Wang L, Bunker CH, et al. Trends in stress urinary incontinence inpatient procedures in the United States, 1979-2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(5):521 e1-6.
19.
Wu JM, Gandhi MP, Shah AD, et al. Trends in inpatient urinary incontinence surgery in the USA, 1998-2007. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(11):1437–43.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Erekson EA, Lopes VV, Raker CA, et al. Ambulatory procedures for female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(5): 497 e1-5.
21.
Rapp DE, Kobashi KC. The evolution of midurethral slings. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2008;5(4):194–201.PubMed
22.
McGuire EJ, Lytton B. Pubovaginal sling procedure for stress incontinence. J Urol. 1978;119(1):82–4.PubMed
23.
Rehman H, Bezerra CC, Bruschini H, et al. Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;1:CD001754.PubMed
24.
Ulmsten U, Falconer C, Johnson P, et al. A multicenter study of tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) for surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1998;9(4):210–3.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Ogah J, Cody DJ, Rogerson L. Minimally invasive synthetic suburethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women: a short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(3):284–91.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Washington JL. Commercial products for pelvic repair. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011;17(5):218–25.PubMed
27.
Abdel-Fattah M, Ford JA, Lim CP, et al. Single-incision mini-slings versus standard midurethral slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. Eur Urol. 2011;60(3):468–80.PubMedCrossRef
28.
•• Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh: Update on the Safety and Effectiveness of Transvaginal Placement for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. 2011 [cited 2011 October 15]; Available from: http://​www.​fda.​gov/​downloads/​MedicalDevices/​Safety/​AlertsandNotices​/​UCM262760.​pdf. All pelvic surgeons should be familiar with the recent FDA notifications and actions regarding transvaginal synthetic mesh for POP repair. Mesh augmentation affords many benefits in the treatment of POP but may also carry significant risks of which the surgeon needs to be aware and the patient informed.
29.
Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L. Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979-1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188(1):108–15.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Brown JS, Waetjen LE, Subak LL, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(4):712–6.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Jones KA, Shepherd JP, Oliphant SS, et al. Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979-2006. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2010;202(5):501 e1-7.
32.
Shah AD, Kohli N, Rajan SS, et al. The age distribution, rates, and types of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in the USA. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(3):421–8.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Bradley SL, Weidner AC, Siddiqui NY, et al. Shifts in national rates of inpatient prolapse surgery emphasize current coding inadequacies. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011;17(4):204–8.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Brubaker L, Glazener CMA, Jacquetin B, et al. Surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. In: Abrams P et al., editors. Incontinence: 4th international consultation on incontinence. Paris, France: Health Publications Ltd; 2009. p. 1273–320.
35.
Jacquetin B, Fatton B, Rosenthal C, et al. Total transvaginal mesh (TVM) technique for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a 3-year prospective follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(12):1455–62.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Littman PM, Culligan PJ. The Rapid Evolution of Vaginal Mesh delivery systems for the Correction of Pelvic organ Prolapse: Part I. The Female Patient. 2009;34(April):2–8.
37.
• Gomelsky A, Penson DF, Dmochowski RR. Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) surgery: the evidence for the repairs. BJU Int. 2011;107(11): 1704-19. This is a thorough review of the scientific literature regarding POP surgical repairs.
38.
Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;4:CD004014.PubMed
39.
Jia X, Glazener C, Mowatt G, et al. Efficacy and safety of using mesh or grafts in surgery for anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2008;115(11):1350–61.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Feiner B, Jelovsek JE, Maher C. Efficacy and safety of transvaginal mesh kits in the treatment of prolapse of the vaginal apex: a systematic review. BJOG. 2009;116(1):15–24.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Abed H, Rahn DD, Lowenstein L, et al. Incidence and management of graft erosion, wound granulation, and dyspareunia following vaginal prolapse repair with graft materials: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(7):789–98.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Padmanabhan P, Hutchinson RC, Reynolds WS, et al. Approach to management of iatrogenic foreign bodies of the lower urinary tract following reconstructive pelvic surgery. J Urol, 2012.
43.
Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.PubMedCrossRef
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
•• Murphy M, Holzberg A, van Raalte H, et al. Time to rethink: an evidence-based response from pelvic surgeons to the FDA Safety Communication: “UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse”. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(1): 5-9. This is an important rebuttal to the conclusions made by the FDA regarding transvaginal mesh placement, highlighting issues for which transvaginal synthetic mesh may have been inappropriately singled out.
49.
Pulliam SJ, Ferzandi TR, Hota LS, et al. Use of synthetic mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery: a survey of attitudes and practice patterns of urogynecologists. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(12):1405–8.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Jha S, Moran P. The UK national prolapse survey: 5 years on. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(5):517–28.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Nager CW, Brubaker L, Daneshgari F, et al. Design of the Value of Urodynamic Evaluation (ValUE) trial: A non-inferiority randomized trial of preoperative urodynamic investigations. Contemp Clin Trials. 2009;30(6):531–9.PubMedCrossRef
52.
•• Chong EC, Khan AA, Anger JT. The financial burden of stress urinary incontinence among women in the United States. Curr Urol Rep. 2011; 12(5): p. 358-62. This is a thorough summary of several of the most recent cost-effectiveness studies regarding SUI treatment.
53.
Anger JT, Saigal CS, Madison R, et al. Increasing costs of urinary incontinence among female Medicare beneficiaries. J Urol. 2006;176(1):247–51. discussion 251.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Wilson L, Brown JS, Shin GP, et al. Annual direct cost of urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(3):398–406.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Subak LL, Waetjen LE, van den Eeden S, et al. Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(4):646–51.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Sung VW, Washington B, Raker CA. Costs of ambulatory care related to female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(5):483 e1-4.
57.
Presthus JB, Van Drie D, Graham C. MiniArc single-incision sling in the office setting. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012.
58.
Ostergard DR. Lessons from the past: directions for the future. Do new marketed surgical procedures and grafts produce ethical, personal liability, and legal concerns for physicians? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(6):591–8.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Wall LL, Brown D. The perils of commercially driven surgical innovation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(1):30 e1-4.
Metadaten
Titel
Trends in Care Delivery for Disorders of the Female Pelvic Floor
verfasst von
W. Stuart Reynolds
David Penson
Roger R. Dmochowski
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2012
Verlag
Current Science Inc.
Erschienen in
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports / Ausgabe 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1931-7212
Elektronische ISSN: 1931-7220
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-012-0137-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2012

Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports 3/2012 Zur Ausgabe

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Lessons Learned from a Decade of Multicenter Cooperative Clinical Trials in Stress Urinary Incontinence

Invited Commentary

Stress Urinary Incontinence Treatment Using Stem Cells: Are We Close to the Future?

Voiding Dysfunction Evaluation (JT Anger, Section Editor)

Evaluation of Primary Bladder Neck Obstruction in Men

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Biologic Materials for Pelvic Floor Reconstruction

Voiding Dysfunction Evaluation (JT Anger, Section Editor)

Evaluation of Postprostatectomy Incontinence: Determining Candidacy for the Transobturator Sling

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Mesh for Anterior Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Where Do We Go Now?

Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie

Neue S3-Leitlinie zur unkomplizierten Zystitis: Auf Antibiotika verzichten?

15.05.2024 Harnwegsinfektionen Nachrichten

Welche Antibiotika darf man bei unkomplizierter Zystitis verwenden und wovon sollte man die Finger lassen? Welche pflanzlichen Präparate können helfen? Was taugt der zugelassene Impfstoff? Antworten vom Koordinator der frisch überarbeiteten S3-Leitlinie, Prof. Florian Wagenlehner.

Viel pflanzliche Nahrung, seltener Prostata-Ca.-Progression

12.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Ein hoher Anteil pflanzlicher Nahrung trägt möglicherweise dazu bei, das Progressionsrisiko von Männern mit Prostatakarzinomen zu senken. In einer US-Studie war das Risiko bei ausgeprägter pflanzlicher Ernährung in etwa halbiert.

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

08.05.2024 Gesellschaft Nachrichten

In einer Leseranfrage in der Zeitschrift Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology möchte ein anonymer Dermatologe bzw. eine anonyme Dermatologin wissen, ob er oder sie einen Patienten behandeln muss, der eine rassistische Tätowierung trägt.

Hypertherme Chemotherapie bietet Chance auf Blasenerhalt

07.05.2024 Harnblasenkarzinom Nachrichten

Eine hypertherme intravesikale Chemotherapie mit Mitomycin kann für Patienten mit hochriskantem nicht muskelinvasivem Blasenkrebs eine Alternative zur radikalen Zystektomie darstellen. Kölner Urologen berichten über ihre Erfahrungen.

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise