Mark E Vierhout1, Jackie Stoutjesdijk, Johan Spruijt. 1. Department of Gynaecology, Huispost 415, University Medical Centre St Radboud, Postbus 6500, HB, Nijmegen, Gelderland, The Netherlands. m.vierhout@obgyn.umcn.nl
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the pre- and intraoperative situation using the POP-Q system during optimally standardized conditions of both examinations. STUDY DESIGN: In a prospective observational study, 108 women were compared. The POP-Q in the outpatient department (preoperative) was compared with the situation just prior to surgery after full anesthesia was reached (intraoperative). During the intraoperative measurement, traction with 0.5 kg force was applied on all relevant places. RESULTS: The pre- and intraoperative measurements were all significant correlated with the R-values between 0.43 and 0.85. All six points, which are measured during the POP-Q, were more prolapsed in the intra- as compared with the preoperative situation. The points Bp, C, and D were significantly more prolapsed, but for the points Aa, Ba, and Ap this was not significant. Fifteen patients were upstaged by the intraoperative measurements and five patients were downstaged in the overall POP-Q grading system. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative evaluation of the prolapse can reveal significant changes as compared with the preoperative situation. In general, the prolapse is more pronounced especially in the middle and posterior compartment.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the pre- and intraoperative situation using the POP-Q system during optimally standardized conditions of both examinations. STUDY DESIGN: In a prospective observational study, 108 women were compared. The POP-Q in the outpatient department (preoperative) was compared with the situation just prior to surgery after full anesthesia was reached (intraoperative). During the intraoperative measurement, traction with 0.5 kg force was applied on all relevant places. RESULTS: The pre- and intraoperative measurements were all significant correlated with the R-values between 0.43 and 0.85. All six points, which are measured during the POP-Q, were more prolapsed in the intra- as compared with the preoperative situation. The points Bp, C, and D were significantly more prolapsed, but for the points Aa, Ba, and Ap this was not significant. Fifteen patients were upstaged by the intraoperative measurements and five patients were downstaged in the overall POP-Q grading system. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative evaluation of the prolapse can reveal significant changes as compared with the preoperative situation. In general, the prolapse is more pronounced especially in the middle and posterior compartment.
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: A F Hall; J P Theofrastous; G W Cundiff; R L Harris; L F Hamilton; S E Swift; R C Bump Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Hema D Brazell; C Sage Claydon; Janet Li; Carol Moore; Nina Dereska; Suzanne Hudson; Steven Swift Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-04-28 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Fay L Chao; Anna Rosamilia; Peter L Dwyer; Alex Polyakov; Lore Schierlitz; Gerard Agnew Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-01-26 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Robin M F van der Weiden; Elena Rociu; Guido H H Mannaerts; Marcel H A van Hooff; Mark E Vierhout; Mariella I J Withagen Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-10-22 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Kathryn S Williams; Lisa Rosen; Marjorie L Pilkinton; Laura Dhariwal; Harvey A Winkler Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 2.894