OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the biomechanical properties of vaginal and systemic skin in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, 25 women with pelvic organ prolapse and 23 age-matched women with normal pelvic support were recruited from an office setting. A Cutometer MPA 580 and DermaLab skin probe were used to measure systemic biomechanical parameters and a 1.5 mm offset DermaLab skin probe was used for vaginal biomechanical measurements. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic, obstetrical, or gynecologic information between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in the systemic biomechanical parameters between the 2 groups. Women with pelvic organ prolapse had significantly more extensible vaginal skin than women with normal pelvic support (initial stiffness index 7.3 vs 10.9 kpa, final stiffness index 5.9 vs 10.7 kpa; all P values less than .01). Furthermore, vaginal extensibility was related to pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage in a linear fashion. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that local, rather than systemic, alterations in biomechanical skin properties are associated with pelvic organ prolapse.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the biomechanical properties of vaginal and systemic skin in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, 25 women with pelvic organ prolapse and 23 age-matched women with normal pelvic support were recruited from an office setting. A Cutometer MPA 580 and DermaLab skin probe were used to measure systemic biomechanical parameters and a 1.5 mm offset DermaLab skin probe was used for vaginal biomechanical measurements. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic, obstetrical, or gynecologic information between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in the systemic biomechanical parameters between the 2 groups. Women with pelvic organ prolapse had significantly more extensible vaginal skin than women with normal pelvic support (initial stiffness index 7.3 vs 10.9 kpa, final stiffness index 5.9 vs 10.7 kpa; all P values less than .01). Furthermore, vaginal extensibility was related to pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage in a linear fashion. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that local, rather than systemic, alterations in biomechanical skin properties are associated with pelvic organ prolapse.
Authors: Okechukwu A Ibeanu; Ralph R Chesson; Dane Sandquist; Javier Perez; Kerri Santiago; Thomas E Nolan Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Yvonne Hsu; Luyun Chen; Julie Tumbarello; James A Ashton-Miller; John O L DeLancey Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Yves Ozog; Maja L Konstantinovic; Erika Werbrouck; Dirk De Ridder; Mazza Edoardo; Jan Deprest Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Leise R Knoepp; Kelly C McDermott; Alvaro Muñoz; Joan L Blomquist; Victoria L Handa Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-08-17 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jana D Illston; Thomas L Wheeler; C Richard Parker; Michael G Conner; Kathryn L Burgio; Patricia S Goode; Holly E Richter Journal: Maturitas Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 4.342