OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of vaginal hysterectomy (combined with anterior and/or posterior colporraphy) and abdominal sacro-colpopexy (with preservation of the uterus) on urogenital function. DESIGN: Randomised trial. SETTING: Three teaching hospitals in The Netherlands. POPULATION: Eighty-two patients undergoing surgical correction of uterine prolapse stages II-IV. METHODS: Participating patients completed the urogenital distress inventory (UDI), before and at six weeks, six months and one year after surgery, to measure discomfort of prolapse and micturition symptoms. Domain scores of the UDI (ranging from 0 to 100, higher scores indicating more discomfort) were compared between groups at all time points. Findings at pelvic examination, number of doctor visits within the first year after surgery because of pelvic floor symptoms and performed or planned surgery of recurrent genital prolapse were also compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Domain scores of the UDI at one year after surgery. RESULTS: At one year after surgery, scores on the discomfort/pain domain (mean difference 7.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-13.2), overactive bladder domain (mean difference 8.7, 95% CI 0.5-16.9) and obstructive micturition domain (mean difference 10.3, 95% CI 0.6-20.1) of the UDI were significantly higher in the abdominal group than in the vaginal group. Findings at pelvic examination were similar in both groups. Doctor visits because of pelvic floor symptoms were more frequent in the abdominal group than in the vaginal group. Re-operation was performed or planned in 9 of the 41 patients who underwent abdominal surgery and in 1 of the 41 patients who underwent vaginal surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 11.2, 95% CI 1.4-90.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that vaginal hysterectomy with anterior and/or posterior colporraphy is preferable to abdominal sacro-colpopexy with preservation of the uterus as surgical correction in patients with uterine prolapse stages II-IV.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of vaginal hysterectomy (combined with anterior and/or posterior colporraphy) and abdominal sacro-colpopexy (with preservation of the uterus) on urogenital function. DESIGN: Randomised trial. SETTING: Three teaching hospitals in The Netherlands. POPULATION: Eighty-two patients undergoing surgical correction of uterine prolapse stages II-IV. METHODS: Participating patients completed the urogenital distress inventory (UDI), before and at six weeks, six months and one year after surgery, to measure discomfort of prolapse and micturition symptoms. Domain scores of the UDI (ranging from 0 to 100, higher scores indicating more discomfort) were compared between groups at all time points. Findings at pelvic examination, number of doctor visits within the first year after surgery because of pelvic floor symptoms and performed or planned surgery of recurrent genital prolapse were also compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Domain scores of the UDI at one year after surgery. RESULTS: At one year after surgery, scores on the discomfort/pain domain (mean difference 7.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-13.2), overactive bladder domain (mean difference 8.7, 95% CI 0.5-16.9) and obstructive micturition domain (mean difference 10.3, 95% CI 0.6-20.1) of the UDI were significantly higher in the abdominal group than in the vaginal group. Findings at pelvic examination were similar in both groups. Doctor visits because of pelvic floor symptoms were more frequent in the abdominal group than in the vaginal group. Re-operation was performed or planned in 9 of the 41 patients who underwent abdominal surgery and in 1 of the 41 patients who underwent vaginal surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 11.2, 95% CI 1.4-90.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that vaginal hysterectomy with anterior and/or posterior colporraphy is preferable to abdominal sacro-colpopexy with preservation of the uterus as surgical correction in patients with uterine prolapse stages II-IV.
Authors: Viviane Dietz; Steven E Schraffordt Koops; Steven E Schraffordt Koops; C Huub van der Vaart Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2008-12-16
Authors: Tiny A de Boer; Alfredo L Milani; Kirsten B Kluivers; Mariella I J Withagen; Mark E Vierhout Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2009-08-11
Authors: Viviane Dietz; Carl H van der Vaart; Yolanda van der Graaf; Peter Heintz; Steven E Schraffordt Koops Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-10-16 Impact factor: 2.894