OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the nature of the anatomic defects in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) correlates with the character of the symptoms. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional investigation within a population-based sample. Two hundred eighty women who had completed a symptom questionnaire were examined according to POP quantification by two gynecologists blinded to symptom reports. RESULTS: An age- and parity-adjusted logistic regression model, controlling for POP in other compartments, revealed that the feeling of vaginal bulge was specific to prolapse but not to any particular compartment, although the association was strongest with anterior-wall prolapse (odds ratio [OR] for the symptom among women with stage II-IV relative to stage 0 was 5.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-13.3). Urge urinary incontinence tended to be linked to POP in either the anterior or posterior wall, but the association was stronger with anterior-wall prolapse. Stress urinary incontinence was strongly linked to posterior-wall prolapse (stage II-IV OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.9-15.2). Self-reports of hard/lumpy stool and difficult or painful defecation tended to be associated with anterior-wall prolapse but without consistent relationships with stage. Painful defecation was the only bowel symptom significantly linked to posterior-wall prolapse (P=.05). CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor-related symptoms do not predict the anatomic location of the prolapse in women with mild to moderate prolapse.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the nature of the anatomic defects in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) correlates with the character of the symptoms. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional investigation within a population-based sample. Two hundred eighty women who had completed a symptom questionnaire were examined according to POP quantification by two gynecologists blinded to symptom reports. RESULTS: An age- and parity-adjusted logistic regression model, controlling for POP in other compartments, revealed that the feeling of vaginal bulge was specific to prolapse but not to any particular compartment, although the association was strongest with anterior-wall prolapse (odds ratio [OR] for the symptom among women with stage II-IV relative to stage 0 was 5.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-13.3). Urge urinary incontinence tended to be linked to POP in either the anterior or posterior wall, but the association was stronger with anterior-wall prolapse. Stress urinary incontinence was strongly linked to posterior-wall prolapse (stage II-IV OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.9-15.2). Self-reports of hard/lumpy stool and difficult or painful defecation tended to be associated with anterior-wall prolapse but without consistent relationships with stage. Painful defecation was the only bowel symptom significantly linked to posterior-wall prolapse (P=.05). CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor-related symptoms do not predict the anatomic location of the prolapse in women with mild to moderate prolapse.
Authors: Mitchell B Berger; Giselle E Kolenic; Dee E Fenner; Daniel M Morgan; John O L DeLancey Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Alfredo L Milani; Mariella I J Withagen; Karlijn J Schweitzer; Erica W M Janszen; Mark E Vierhout Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-02-10 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Marie-Andrée Harvey; Hui Ju Chih; Roxana Geoffrion; Baharak Amir; Alka Bhide; Pawel Miotla; Peter F W M Rosier; Ifeoma Offiah; Manidip Pal; Alexandriah Nicole Alas Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jennifer Campbell; Corinne Pedroletti; Linn Ekhed; Emil Nüssler; Annika Strandell Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-10-07 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Tiny A de Boer; Kirsten B Kluivers; Mariella I J Withagen; Alfredo L Milani; Mark E Vierhout Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-04-24 Impact factor: 2.894