Vaginal morphology and position associated with prolapse recurrence after vaginal surgery: A secondary analysis of the DEMAND study

OBJECTIVE

To identify vaginal morphology and position factors associated with prolapse recurrence following vaginal surgery.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of magnetic resonance images (MRI) of the Defining Mechanisms of Anterior Vaginal Wall Descent cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Eight clinical sites in the US Pelvic Floor Disorders Network.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

Women who underwent vaginal mesh hysteropexy (hysteropexy) with sacrospinous fixation or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (hysterectomy) for uterovaginal prolapse between April 2013 and February 2015.

METHODS

The MRI (rest, strain) obtained 30-42 months after surgery, or earlier for participants with recurrence who desired reoperation before 30 months, were analysed. MRI-based prolapse recurrence was defined as prolapse beyond the hymen at strain on MRI. Vaginal segmentations (at rest) were used to create three-dimensional models placed in a morphometry algorithm to quantify and compare vaginal morphology (angulation, dimensions) and position.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Vaginal angulation (upper, lower and upper-lower vaginal angles in the sagittal and coronal plane), dimensions (length, maximum transverse width, surface area, volume) and position (apex, mid-vagina) at rest.

RESULTS

Of the 82 women analysed, 12/41 (29%) in the hysteropexy group and 22/41 (54%) in the hysterectomy group had prolapse recurrence. After hysteropexy, women with recurrence had a more laterally deviated upper vagina (p = 0.02) at rest than women with successful surgery. After hysterectomy, women with recurrence had a more inferiorly (lower) positioned vaginal apex (p = 0.01) and mid-vagina (p = 0.01) at rest than women with successful surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaginal angulation and position were associated with prolapse recurrence and suggestive of vaginal support mechanisms related to surgical technique and potential unaddressed anatomical defects. Future prospective studies in women before and after prolapse surgery may distinguish these two factors.

Favorable Postoperative Outcomes After Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Using a Wide-Arm ORIHIME® Mesh

Introduction Transvaginal mesh surgery (TVM) is an effective treatment option for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Although ORIHIME®, the only available mesh product, is thin, soft, and easy to handle, it has the disadvantages of sliding off or mildly adhering to the surrounding tissues. The current study compared the efficacy of using wide-arm ORIHIME (Kono Seisakusho, Japan, Tokyo), non-wide arm ORIHIME, Gynemesh PS (Johnson and Johnson, Japan, Tokyo), and Polyform (Boston Scientific Japan, Japan, Tokyo) meshes for TVM. Methods The study included 116 patients who underwent TVM (Prolift with Gynemesh PS (n = 14); Elevate with Polyform (n = 43); Uphold with non-wide-arm ORIHIME (n = 24); Uphold with wide-arm ORIHIME (n = 35)) at our hospital. Pre- and post-surgical changes in symptoms were measured using questionnaires and 60-minute pad weight testing and compared by mesh type and surgical methods used. Results The residual urine volume, 60-minute pad weight testing, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS), and international consultation on incontinence questionnaire-short form score (ICIQ-SF) significantly improved one year postoperatively in the TVM with the wide-arm ORIHIME group. Comparison of pre and one-year postoperative findings by mesh type and surgical methods used showed no significant differences in the 60-minute pad test, IPSS, Quality of Life (QOL), OABSS, and urinary incontinence in daily life scores, and improvement in residual urine volume, ICIQ-SF, and mesh exposure and POP recurrence rates in the TVM with the wide-arm ORIHIME group. Conclusion TVM with wide-arm ORIHIME had better postoperative outcomes compared to TVM with other mesh products.

The Outcome of Sacrocolpopexy/Sacrohysteropexy for Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Predictors of Anatomical Failure

Background

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a medical condition that profoundly impacts women's quality of life. Unfortunately, the literature lacks long-term predictors and risk factors for its recurrence. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of Sacrocolpopexy/Sacrohysteropexy and to identify the predictors of recurrence in a Saudi setting.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study, all patients who underwent Sacrocolpopexy (n=144) and Sacrohysteropexy (n=56) between 2009-2021 were followed up. Electronic medical records were examined to collect data on the following: Patient characteristics [age, parity, BMI, and past medical and surgical history], prolapse-related characteristics/symptoms, Surgery-related characteristics [type and approach of surgery, mesh type, and concomitant surgery], and Outcome characteristics. Postoperative anatomical success and failure rates were determined according to the Baden-Walker classification. Logistic regression analysis was applied to identify the predictors of overall anatomical failure of Sacrocolpopexy. Significance was considered at p<0.05.

Results

Success rates of 96.8%, 99.4%, and 85.2% were detected in the anterior, apical, and posterior vaginal prolapse, respectively, with an overall success rate of 83.1%. The overall failure rate was 15.9%, with an incidence density of 5.98 per 100 women-years. The onset of failure in 27 failure cases ranged from 40 days to 11.5 years postoperative. After adjustment for the possible potential confounders, older age (OR=1.06, 95% CI:1.01‒1.13, p=0.03) and the presence of diabetes (OR=4.93, 95% CI:1.33‒18.33, p=0.02) were the only significant predictors of operation failure. As for complications, six cases (3.6%) required reoperation, two cases (1.2%) had a bowel obstruction two and seven years after surgery, and one patient (0.6%) had vaginal mesh exposure.

Conclusion

The outcomes of Sacrocolpopexy/Sacrohysteropexy in our study are comparable to those in previous studies. Diabetes and elder age at the time of the surgery played a role in predicting recurrence. Sacrocolpopexy has a long-term profile of safety and efficacy. These findings could be key to stratifying surgical plans for pelvic organ prolapse cases.

Postoperative Complications and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Recurrence Following Combined Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Rectal Prolapse Surgery Compared to Pelvic Organ Prolapse Only Surgery

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in combined pelvic organ prolapse and rectal prolapse surgery for concomitant pelvic floor prolapse despite a paucity of data regarding complications and clinical outcomes of combined repair.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to compare the <30-day postoperative complication rate in women undergoing combined POP + RP surgery with that of women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery. The secondary objectives were to describe the <30-day postoperative complications, compare the pelvic organ prolapse recurrence between the 2 groups, and determine the preoperative predictors of <30-day postoperative complications and predictors of pelvic organ prolapse recurrence.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study at 5 academic hospitals. Patients undergoing combined pelvic organ prolapse and rectal prolapse surgery were matched by age, pelvic organ prolapse stage by leading compartment, and pelvic organ prolapse procedure compared with those undergoing pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery from March 2003 to March 2020. The primary outcome measure was <30-day complications separated into Clavien-Dindo classes. The secondary outcome measures were (1) subsequent pelvic organ prolapse surgeries and (2) pelvic organ prolapse recurrence, defined as patients who complained of vaginal bulge symptoms postoperatively.

RESULTS

Overall, 204 women underwent combined surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and rectal prolapse, and 204 women underwent surgery for pelvic organ prolapse only. The average age (59.3±1.0 vs 59.0±1.0) and mean parity (2.3±1.5 vs 2.6±1.8) were similar in each group. Of note, 109 (26.7%) patients had at least one <30-day postoperative complication. The proportion of patients who had a complication in the combined surgery group and pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery group was similar (27.5% vs 26.0%; P=.82). The Clavien-Dindo scores were similar between the groups (grade I, 10.3% vs 9.3%; grade II, 11.8% vs 12.3%; grade III, 3.9% vs 4.4%; grade IV, 1.0% vs 0%; grade V, 0.5% vs 0%). Patients undergoing combined surgery were less likely to develop postoperative urinary tract infections and urinary retention but were more likely to be treated for wound infections and pelvic abscesses than patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery. After adjusting for combined surgery vs pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery and parity, patients who had anti-incontinence procedures (adjusted odds ratio, 1.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-2.94; P=.02) and perineorrhaphies (adjusted odds ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.70; P=.02) were more likely to have <30-day postoperative complications. Of note, 12 patients in the combined surgery group and 15 patients in the pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery group had subsequent pelvic organ prolapse repairs (5.9% vs 7.4%; P=.26). In the combined surgery group, 10 patients (4.9%) underwent 1 repair, and 2 patients (1.0%) underwent 2 repairs. All patients who had recurrent pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery group had 1 subsequent pelvic organ prolapse repair. Of note, 21 patients in the combined surgery group and 28 patients in the pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery group reported recurrent pelvic organ prolapse (10.3% vs 13.7%; P=.26). On multivariable analysis adjusted for number of previous pelvic organ prolapse repairs, combined surgery vs pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery, and perineorrhaphy at the time of surgery, patients were more likely to have a subsequent pelvic organ prolapse surgery if they had had ≥2 previous pelvic organ prolapse repairs (adjusted odds ratio, 6.06; 95% confidence interval, 2.10-17.5; P=.01). The average follow-up times were 307.2±31.5 days for the combined surgery cohort and 487.7±49.9 days for the pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery cohort. Survival curves indicated that the median time to recurrence was not statistically significant (log-rank, P=.265) between the combined surgery group (4.2±0.4 years) and the pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery group (5.6±0.4 years).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing combined pelvic organ prolapse and rectal prolapse surgery had a similar risk of <30-day postoperative complications compared with patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery. Furthermore, patients who underwent combined surgery had a similar risk of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse and subsequent pelvic organ prolapse surgery compared with patients who underwent pelvic organ prolapse-only surgery.

Risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To update a previously published systematic review and perform a meta-analysis on the risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Embase were systematically searched. We searched from July 1, 2014 until July 5, 2021. The previous search was from inception until August 4, 2014.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials and cross-sectional and cohort studies conducted in the Western developed countries that reported on multivariable analysis of risk factors for primary prolapse or prolapse recurrence were included. The definition of prolapse was based on anatomic references, and prolapse recurrence was defined as anatomic recurrence after native tissue repair. Studies on prolapse recurrence with a median follow-up of ≥1 year after surgery were included.

METHODS

Quality assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data from the previous review and this review were combined into forest plots, and meta-analyses were performed where possible. If the data could not be pooled, "confirmed risk factors" were identified if ≥2 studies reported a significant association in multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

After screening, 14 additional studies were selected-8 on the risk factors for primary prolapse and 6 on prolapse recurrence. Combined with the results from the previous review, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing the data of 47,429 women. Not all studies could be pooled because of heterogeneity. Meta-analyses showed that birthweight (n=3, odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.06), age (n=3, odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-1.47), body mass index (n=2, odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.62), and levator defect (n=2, odds ratio, 3.99; 95% confidence interval, 2.57-6.18) are statistically significant risk factors, and cesarean delivery (n=2, pooled odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.20) and smoking (n=3, odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.75) are protective factors for primary prolapse. Parity, vaginal delivery, and levator hiatal area are identified as "confirmed risk factors." For prolapse recurrence, preoperative prolapse stage (n=5, odds ratio, 2.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-3.73) and age (n=2, odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.99-6.08) are statistically significant risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal delivery, parity, birthweight, age, body mass index, levator defect, and levator hiatal area are risk factors, and cesarean delivery and smoking are protective factors for primary prolapse. Preoperative prolapse stage and younger age are risk factors for prolapse recurrence after native tissue surgery.

Enlargement of the genital hiatus is associated with prolapse recurrence in patients undergoing sacrospinous ligament fixation

OBJECTIVE

To correlate genital hiatus (GH) size with surgical failures in patients undergoing sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and compare anatomic outcomes after classification based on GH size.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 81 patients who underwent SSLF for apical prolapse from 2010 to 2016 at a teaching hospital. Anatomical outcome is reported using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantifications System. A comparison of parametric continuous variables was performed using unpaired Student t test. Categorical variables were evaluated using Pearson's χ² test and Fisher's exact test. A P value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Among the 81 patients, no difference in age, parity, body mass index, preoperative prolapse stage or follow-up time was noted between those whose surgery succeeded and those with failed surgery. Postoperatively, a widened GH was significantly associated with recurrent prolapse (P < 0.001). When the preoperative size of the GH was dichotomized into widened (≥4 cm) or normal (<4 cm), there was a non-significant (P = 0.444) trend of more failures in the widened GH group. A posterior colporrhaphy did not improve success.

CONCLUSION

Both preoperative and postoperative widened GH correlated with having more surgical failures following SSLF. Importantly, postoperatively a normal size GH was significantly associated with more surgical success.

Prolapse recurrence following sacrocolpopexy vs uterosacral ligament suspension: a comparison stratified by Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage

BACKGROUND

Insufficient evidence evaluates which pelvic organ prolapse surgery is best suited to an individual woman based on the stage of her prolapse.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare prolapse recurrence rates following sacrocolpopexy and uterosacral ligament suspension after stratifying by preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage.

STUDY DESIGN

We compared all women who underwent minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy or vaginal or minimally invasive uterosacral ligament suspension from 2009 through 2015 at a large academic center. All women with preoperative and postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification data were included. Patients were grouped by preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage for analysis. Recurrence rates following sacrocolpopexy and uterosacral ligament suspension were compared for patients presenting with stage II, III, and IV prolapse, adjusting for potential confounders in regression models. Prolapse recurrence was defined as any retreatment for prolapse or any Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point beyond the hymen.

RESULTS

Of 756 women, 633 underwent sacrocolpopexy (83.7%) and 123 (16.3%) underwent uterosacral ligament suspension. In all, 189 (25%) had preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage II prolapse, 527 (69.7%) stage III, and 40 (5.3%) stage IV. Patients were predominantly Caucasian (97.3%) with mean age 59.8 ± 9.5 years. Compared to uterosacral ligament suspension patients, more sacrocolpopexy patients had undergone prior prolapse repair (20.9% vs 5.7%, P < .001) and fewer had known diabetes mellitus (7.9% vs 13.8%, P = .034). Characteristics of the groups were otherwise similar. Median follow-up was 41.0 (interquartile range 13.0-88.8) weeks. Stage II prolapse patients had similar recurrence rates following sacrocolpopexy or uterosacral ligament suspension (6.0% vs 5.0, P = 1.00). However, stage III prolapse patients were more likely to experience recurrence following uterosacral ligament suspension (25.7% vs 7.8%, P < .001). This difference persisted after controlling for age, body mass index, smoking, diabetes, and prior prolapse repair (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-8.2). There was no discernable difference in recurrence rates for women with stage IV prolapse, although sample size was limited.

CONCLUSION

Sacrocolpopexy resulted in a lower prolapse recurrence rate than uterosacral ligament suspension for stage III prolapse. However, there was no difference in recurrence rate among women with preoperative stage II prolapse, suggesting mesh augmentation may not be indicated for these patients. Larger prospective trials are necessary for confirmation.

Does a more extensive mucosal excision prevent haemorrhoidal recurrence after stapled haemorrhoidopexy? Long-term outcome of a randomized controlled trial

AIM

The study aimed in a multicentric randomized controlled trial to define the role of a more extensive mucosal resection on recurrence of mucosal prolapse in patients with Stage III haemorrhoids undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy.

METHOD

In all, 135 patients were randomized to treatment with a PPH-01/03 (Ethicon EndoSurgery) or an EEA (Covidien) stapler. They were reviewed after a minimum follow-up of 4 years to determine the rate of recurrent mucosal prolapse and general condition (wellness evaluation score). Postoperative bowel dysfunction was assessed using the Rome III criteria.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven (65%) of the 135 patients (48 in the EEA stapler group and 37 in the PPH group) were available for long-term follow-up. The two groups were comparable for age, gender and duration of follow-up (mean 49.3 ± 5.4 months and 49.0 ± 5.3 months respectively). In the EEA group, 11 (23%) patients had some degree of recurrent prolapse compared with 12 (32%) in the PPH group (P = 0.409). Persistence of anal bleeding was significantly higher in the PPH group (P = 0.04) while the postoperative Haemorrhoid Symptom Score was significantly better in the EEA group (1.73 ± 1.65 vs 3.17 ± 1.94, P < 0.001). The wellness evaluation score was significantly better in the EEA group (1.2 ± 1.27 vs 0.6 ± 1.0, P = 0.028). Furthermore, 7 (15%) of the patients in the EEA group complained of some evacuation disturbance compared with 13 (36%) in the PPH group (P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

The study failed to demonstrate any significant difference in the long-term recurrence rate of Stage III haemorrhoids using EEA or PPH. Nevertheless, use of the larger volume EEA provides better symptom resolution compared with PPH.