Literature DB >> 19701041

Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

Matthew D Barber1, Linda Brubaker, Ingrid Nygaard, Thomas L Wheeler, Joeseph Schaffer, Zhen Chen, Cathie Spino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe pelvic organ prolapse surgical success rates using a variety of definitions with differing requirements for anatomic, symptomatic, or re-treatment outcomes.
METHODS: Eighteen different surgical success definitions were evaluated in participants who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy within the Colpopexy and Urinary Reduction Efforts trial. The participants' assessments of overall improvement and rating of treatment success were compared between surgical success and failure for each of the definitions studied. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to identify significant differences in outcomes between success and failure.
RESULTS: Treatment success varied widely depending on definition used (19.2-97.2%). Approximately 71% of the participants considered their surgery "very successful," and 85.2% considered themselves "much better" than before surgery. Definitions of success requiring all anatomic support to be proximal to the hymen had the lowest treatment success (19.2-57.6%). Approximately 94% achieved surgical success when it was defined as the absence of prolapse beyond the hymen. Subjective cure (absence of bulge symptoms) occurred in 92.1% while absence of re-treatment occurred in 97.2% of participants. Subjective cure was associated with significant improvements in the patient's assessment of both treatment success and overall improvement, more so than any other definition considered (P<.001 and <.001, respectively). Similarly, the greatest difference in symptom burden and health-related quality of life as measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire scores between treatment successes and failures was noted when success was defined as subjective cure (P<.001).
CONCLUSION: The definition of success substantially affects treatment success rates after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. The absence of vaginal bulge symptoms postoperatively has a significant relationship with a patient's assessment of overall improvement, while anatomic success alone does not. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19701041      PMCID: PMC2904469          DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b2b1ae

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  27 in total

1.  Operations and pelvic muscle training in the management of apical support loss (OPTIMAL) trial: design and methods.

Authors:  Matthew D Barber; Linda Brubaker; Shawn Menefee; Peggy Norton; Diane Borello-France; Edward Varner; Joseph Schaffer; Alison Weidner; Xiao Xu; Cathie Spino; Anne Weber
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  Correlation of symptoms with location and severity of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  R M Ellerkmann; G W Cundiff; C F Melick; M A Nihira; K Leffler; A E Bent
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders.

Authors:  M D Barber; M N Kuchibhatla; C F Pieper; R C Bump
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Vaginal wall descensus and pelvic floor symptoms in older women.

Authors:  Catherine S Bradley; Ingrid E Nygaard
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Development and psychometric evaluation of the ICIQ Vaginal Symptoms Questionnaire: the ICIQ-VS.

Authors:  N Price; S R Jackson; K Avery; S T Brookes; P Abrams
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 6.531

6.  Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7).

Authors:  M D Barber; M D Walters; R C Bump
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  P-QOL: a validated questionnaire to assess the symptoms and quality of life of women with urogenital prolapse.

Authors:  G Alessandro Digesu; Vik Khullar; Linda Cardozo; Dudley Robinson; Stefano Salvatore
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-10-21

8.  Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects.

Authors:  Steven Swift; Patrick Woodman; Amy O'Boyle; Margie Kahn; Michael Valley; Deirdre Bland; Wei Wang; Joe Schaffer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  The standardization of terminology for researchers in female pelvic floor disorders.

Authors:  A M Weber; P Abrams; L Brubaker; G Cundiff; G Davis; R R Dmochowski; J Fischer; T Hull; I Nygaard; A C Weidner
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2001

10.  Correlation of symptoms with degree of pelvic organ support in a general population of women: what is pelvic organ prolapse?

Authors:  Steven E Swift; Susan B Tate; Joyce Nicholas
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  148 in total

1.  Advanced uterovaginal prolapse: is vaginal hysterectomy with McCall culdoplasty as effective as in lesser degrees of prolapse?

Authors:  Alexandriah Alas; Neeraja Chandrasekaran; Hemikaa Devakumar; Laura Martin; Eric Hurtado; G Willy Davila
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Medium-term clinical outcomes following surgical repair for vaginal prolapse with tension-free mesh and vaginal support device.

Authors:  T Sayer; J Lim; J M Gauld; P Hinoul; P Jones; N Franco; D Van Drie; M Slack
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Clinical impact of bowel symptoms in women with pelvic floor disorders.

Authors:  José Ananias Vasconcelos Neto; Camila Teixeira Moreira Vasconcelos; Sthela Maria Murad Regadas; Leonardo Robson Pinheiro Sobreira Bezerra; Kathiane Augusto Lustosa; Sara Arcanjo Lino Karbage
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-03-06       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Long-term outcomes after native tissue vs. biological graft-augmented repair in the posterior compartment.

Authors:  Cara L Grimes; Jasmine Tan-Kim; Emily L Whitcomb; Emily S Lukacz; Shawn A Menefee
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 5.  Posterior vaginal compartment prolapse and defecatory dysfunction: are they related?

Authors:  Cara L Grimes; Emily S Lukacz
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 6.  What is the gold standard for posterior vaginal wall prolapse repair: mesh or native tissue?

Authors:  Brian K Marks; Howard B Goldman
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse within 10 years of primary surgery for prolapse.

Authors:  Philipp T Gotthart; Thomas Aigmueller; Peter F J Lang; George Ralph; Vesna Bjelic-Radisic; Karl Tamussino
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for reporting outcomes of surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Philip Toozs-Hobson; Robert Freeman; Matthew Barber; Christopher Maher; Bernard Haylen; Stavros Athanasiou; Steven Swift; Kristene Whitmore; Gamal Ghoniem; Dirk de Ridder
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 9.  Traditional native tissue versus mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repairs: providing an accurate interpretation of current literature.

Authors:  E J Stanford; A Cassidenti; M D Moen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Pelvic floor muscle weakness: a risk factor for anterior vaginal wall prolapse recurrence.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Schachar; Hemikaa Devakumar; Laura Martin; Sara Farag; Eric A Hurtado; G Willy Davila
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.