Gregory Kanter1, Peter C Jeppson2, Brenna Lynn McGuire2, Rebecca G Rogers2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico, MSC 10-5580, Albuquerque, NM, 87131-0001, USA. gkanter@salud.unm.edu. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico, MSC 10-5580, Albuquerque, NM, 87131-0001, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Perineorrhaphy is performed for the prevention of recurrent prolapse, improved sexual function, treatment of pain, and cosmesis. Its use is based on expert opinion with few objective data. We aimed to describe factors that are important to surgeons when deciding to perform perineorrhaphy and variations in surgical technique. METHODS: We administered an anonymous survey to surgeon attendees at the 2014 SGS annual scientific meeting regarding which factors are important when deciding to perform a perineorrhaphy and details of their surgical technique. Surgeons rated the importance of factors; one-way ANOVA was used to rank the decision factors and post hoc pairwise comparisons with Fisher's least significant difference method were used to evaluate the importance between factors. RESULTS: A total of 183 out of 360 surgeon attendees responded. Most were between ages 36 and 60 (79 %), 56 % were female, 64 % practiced in an academic environment, and 64 % had undergone subspecialty training. An enlarged genital hiatus (GH) ranked as the most important factor influencing the decision to perform a perineorrhaphy, followed by a concomitant prolapse procedure (p < 0.001). Sexual function and cosmesis were rated as being less important. The decision to perform perineorrhaphy was made with the patient in 65 % of cases, and otherwise in the operating room. Significant heterogeneity exists regarding surgeon suture preference and how muscles were re-approximated. Most (81 %) reported incorporating structures both proximal and distal to the hymen in their repairs. CONCLUSION: Genital hiatus size and concomitant prolapse procedures ranked highest in surgeons' decision to perform a perineorrhaphy. Significant heterogeneity exists in the indications for and technique used to perform perineorrhaphy.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Perineorrhaphy is performed for the prevention of recurrent prolapse, improved sexual function, treatment of pain, and cosmesis. Its use is based on expert opinion with few objective data. We aimed to describe factors that are important to surgeons when deciding to perform perineorrhaphy and variations in surgical technique. METHODS: We administered an anonymous survey to surgeon attendees at the 2014 SGS annual scientific meeting regarding which factors are important when deciding to perform a perineorrhaphy and details of their surgical technique. Surgeons rated the importance of factors; one-way ANOVA was used to rank the decision factors and post hoc pairwise comparisons with Fisher's least significant difference method were used to evaluate the importance between factors. RESULTS: A total of 183 out of 360 surgeon attendees responded. Most were between ages 36 and 60 (79 %), 56 % were female, 64 % practiced in an academic environment, and 64 % had undergone subspecialty training. An enlarged genital hiatus (GH) ranked as the most important factor influencing the decision to perform a perineorrhaphy, followed by a concomitant prolapse procedure (p < 0.001). Sexual function and cosmesis were rated as being less important. The decision to perform perineorrhaphy was made with the patient in 65 % of cases, and otherwise in the operating room. Significant heterogeneity exists regarding surgeon suture preference and how muscles were re-approximated. Most (81 %) reported incorporating structures both proximal and distal to the hymen in their repairs. CONCLUSION: Genital hiatus size and concomitant prolapse procedures ranked highest in surgeons' decision to perform a perineorrhaphy. Significant heterogeneity exists in the indications for and technique used to perform perineorrhaphy.
Authors: Chiara Ghetti; W Thomas Gregory; S Renee Edwards; Lesley N Otto; Amanda L Clark Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2005-01-20
Authors: Gary Sutkin; Halina M Zyczynski; Amaanti Sridhar; J Eric Jelovsek; Charles R Rardin; Donna Mazloomdoost; David D Rahn; John N Nguyen; Uduak U Andy; Isuzu Meyer; Marie G Gantz Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Gena C Dunivan; Katherine E Lyons; Peter C Jeppson; Cara S Ninivaggio; Yuko M Komesu; Frances M Alba; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2016 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Olivia H Chang; Emily R W Davidson; Tonya N Thomas; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Cecile A Ferrando Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2020-03-07 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Ivan Ignjatovic; Milan Potic; Dragoslav Basic; Ljubomir Dinic; Aleksandar Skakic Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Heather J Furnas; Francisco L Canales; Rachel A Pedreira; Carly Comer; Samuel J Lin; Paul E Banwell Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2021-07-06
Authors: Mustafa Ulubay; Ugur Keskin; Ulas Fidan; Mustafa Ozturk; Serkan Bodur; Ali Yılmaz; Mehmet Ferdi Kinci; Mufit Cemal Yenen Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 3.411