INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of pessaries and surgery in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. METHODS: A total of 554 women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) were recruited and treated with either a vaginal pessary (n = 359) or surgery (n = 195). Using the validated Sheffield POP questionnaire, outcomes were evaluated and then compared at 1 year. RESULTS: At 1 year, the only significant difference between the two groups was increased frequency of intercourse in the surgery group (54% vs 46%; p = 0.028), which was not significant when controlled for age. There was a statistically significant improvement in prolapse, urinary, bowel, and sexual function in both pessary users and those treated surgically. CONCLUSIONS: One year after treatment, women with POP report similar improvement in urinary, bowel, sexual function, and quality of life parameters when treated with pessary or surgical correction.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of pessaries and surgery in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. METHODS: A total of 554 women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) were recruited and treated with either a vaginal pessary (n = 359) or surgery (n = 195). Using the validated Sheffield POP questionnaire, outcomes were evaluated and then compared at 1 year. RESULTS: At 1 year, the only significant difference between the two groups was increased frequency of intercourse in the surgery group (54% vs 46%; p = 0.028), which was not significant when controlled for age. There was a statistically significant improvement in prolapse, urinary, bowel, and sexual function in both pessary users and those treated surgically. CONCLUSIONS: One year after treatment, women with POP report similar improvement in urinary, bowel, sexual function, and quality of life parameters when treated with pessary or surgical correction.
Authors: Vivian W Sung; Sherry Weitzen; Eric R Sokol; Charles R Rardin; Deborah L Myers Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jeffrey L Clemons; Vivian C Aguilar; Tara A Tillinghast; Neil D Jackson; Deborah L Myers Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: K Baeßler; T Aigmüller; S Albrich; C Anthuber; D Finas; T Fink; C Fünfgeld; B Gabriel; U Henscher; F H Hetzer; M Hübner; B Junginger; K Jundt; S Kropshofer; A Kuhn; L Logé; G Nauman; U Peschers; T Pfiffer; O Schwandner; A Strauss; R Tunn; V Viereck Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Marianna Alperin; Aqsa Khan; Emily Dubina; Christopher Tarnay; Ning Wu; Chris L Pashos; Jennifer T Anger Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.091