INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study describes pelvic organ support after childbirth. METHODS: This ancillary analysis of the Childbirth and Pelvic Symptoms Imaging Study compares pelvic organ prolapse quantification 6-12 months after childbirth among three cohorts of primiparous women: vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (n = 106), vaginal delivery without sphincter tear (n = 108), and cesarean without labor (n = 39). RESULTS: Of participants, 31.2% had stage II support. Prolapse to or beyond the hymen was present in 14% after vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (95% confidence interval 8%, 22%), 15% (9%, 24%) after vaginal delivery without sphincter tear, and 5% (1%, 17%) after cesarean without labor (p = 0.23). A study of 132 women per group would be required for 80% power to test differences between 5% and 15%. CONCLUSIONS: While these data provide insufficient power to dismiss a difference in pelvic organ support between modes of delivery, they add to our understanding of support following childbirth.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study describes pelvic organ support after childbirth. METHODS: This ancillary analysis of the Childbirth and Pelvic Symptoms Imaging Study compares pelvic organ prolapse quantification 6-12 months after childbirth among three cohorts of primiparous women: vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (n = 106), vaginal delivery without sphincter tear (n = 108), and cesarean without labor (n = 39). RESULTS: Of participants, 31.2% had stage II support. Prolapse to or beyond the hymen was present in 14% after vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (95% confidence interval 8%, 22%), 15% (9%, 24%) after vaginal delivery without sphincter tear, and 5% (1%, 17%) after cesarean without labor (p = 0.23). A study of 132 women per group would be required for 80% power to test differences between 5% and 15%. CONCLUSIONS: While these data provide insufficient power to dismiss a difference in pelvic organ support between modes of delivery, they add to our understanding of support following childbirth.
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: Susan L Hendrix; Amanda Clark; Ingrid Nygaard; Aaron Aragaki; Vanessa Barnabei; Anne McTiernan Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Christopher B Pierce; Jennifer L Hallock; Joan L Blomquist; Victoria L Handa Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2012 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Clifford Y Wai; Donald D McIntire; Shanna D Atnip; Joseph I Schaffer; Steven L Bloom; Kenneth J Leveno Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Victoria L Handa; Joan L Blomquist; Kelly C McDermott; Sarah Friedman; Alvaro Muñoz Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.661