Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 10/2020

01-10-2020 | Dyspareunia | Original Article

Does concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele reduce the risk of surgical failure in patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy?

Authors: Olivia H. Chang, Emily R. W. Davidson, Tonya N. Thomas, Marie Fidela R. Paraiso, Cecile A. Ferrando

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 10/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To determine if a concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele at the time of sacrocolpopexy reduces the incidence of surgical failure.

Methods

This is a retrospective chart review with a cross‐sectional follow-up survey of all patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy from 2004 to 2014. Demographic and operative data were collected from the medical record. For the cross-sectional portion, patients were contacted to obtain information on symptoms and retreatment after surgery. In this study, we included patients with an asymptomatic rectocele on examination, defined as Ap or Bp ≥ −1 on POP-Q without defecatory dysfunction, which was defined as constipation based on the Rome III criteria, dyschezia, excessive straining and/or splinting to have a bowel movement. The primary outcome was a composite score of subjective bulge symptoms or retreatment for prolapse.

Results

Three hundred forty-four patients met the inclusion criteria: 185 (53.8%) had a sacrocolpopexy only (SCP) and 159 (46.2%) had a concurrent posterior repair (SCP + PR). The composite failure rate was 10.2% (95% CI = 7.4–13.8%), with a 13.5% (25) failure rate in the SCP group compared with 6.3% (10) in the SCP + PR group (p = 0.03). On multivariable logistic regression, the adjusted odds of failure was 2.79 in the SCP compared with the SCP + PR group (CI 1.25-6.23; P = 0.01). The rates of de novo defecatory dysfunction following surgery were low (SCP = 5.6% vs. SCP + PR = 7.5%, p = 0.55).

Conclusions

For patients with asymptomatic rectoceles, a concurrent posterior repair at the time of sacrocolpopexy reduces the odds of composite patient-centered failure without an increased rate of dyspareunia or de novo defecatory dysfunction.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hilger WS, Poulson M, Norton PA. Long-term results of abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189(6):1606–1610. discussion 1610-1. Hilger WS, Poulson M, Norton PA. Long-term results of abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189(6):1606–1610. discussion 1610-1.
2.
go back to reference Culligan PJ, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Hammons G, Graham C, Heit MH. Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187(6):1473–1480. discussion 1481-2. Culligan PJ, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Hammons G, Graham C, Heit MH. Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187(6):1473–1480. discussion 1481-2.
3.
go back to reference Maher CF, Qatawneh AM, Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Cornish A, Schluter PJ. Abdominal sacral colpopexy or vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: a prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(1):20–6.CrossRefPubMed Maher CF, Qatawneh AM, Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Cornish A, Schluter PJ. Abdominal sacral colpopexy or vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: a prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(1):20–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Brown J. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;10:CD012376. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Brown J. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;10:CD012376.
5.
go back to reference DeLancey JOL. Anatomy of the pelvis. In: Thompson JD, Rock JA, editors. TeLinde’s Operative Gynecology, 7th ed. JB Lippincott; 1992. DeLancey JOL. Anatomy of the pelvis. In: Thompson JD, Rock JA, editors. TeLinde’s Operative Gynecology, 7th ed. JB Lippincott; 1992.
6.
go back to reference DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(6 Pt 1):1717–24; discussion 1724-8.CrossRefPubMed DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(6 Pt 1):1717–24; discussion 1724-8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Kanter G, Jeppson PC, McGuire BL, Rogers RG. Perineorrhaphy: commonly performed yet poorly understood. A survey of surgeons. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(12):1797–801.CrossRefPubMed Kanter G, Jeppson PC, McGuire BL, Rogers RG. Perineorrhaphy: commonly performed yet poorly understood. A survey of surgeons. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(12):1797–801.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Lowder JL, Oliphant SS, Shepherd JP, Ghetti C, Sutkin G. Genital hiatus size is associated with and predictive of apical vaginal support loss. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(6):718.e1-718.e8.CrossRefPubMed Lowder JL, Oliphant SS, Shepherd JP, Ghetti C, Sutkin G. Genital hiatus size is associated with and predictive of apical vaginal support loss. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(6):718.e1-718.e8.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Bradley MS, Askew AL, Vaughan MH, Kawasaki A, Visco AG. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: early postoperative outcomes after surgical reduction of enlarged genital hiatus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(5):514.e1–8.CrossRef Bradley MS, Askew AL, Vaughan MH, Kawasaki A, Visco AG. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: early postoperative outcomes after surgical reduction of enlarged genital hiatus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(5):514.e1–8.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Carter-Brooks CM, Lowder JL, Du AL, Lavelle ES, Giugale LE, Shepherd JP. Restoring genital Hiatus to normative values after apical suspension alone versus with level 3 support procedures. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(3):226–30.CrossRefPubMed Carter-Brooks CM, Lowder JL, Du AL, Lavelle ES, Giugale LE, Shepherd JP. Restoring genital Hiatus to normative values after apical suspension alone versus with level 3 support procedures. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(3):226–30.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Fox SD, Stanton SL. Vault prolapse and rectocele: assessment of repair using sacrocolpopexy with mesh interposition. BJOG. 2000;107(11):1371–5.CrossRefPubMed Fox SD, Stanton SL. Vault prolapse and rectocele: assessment of repair using sacrocolpopexy with mesh interposition. BJOG. 2000;107(11):1371–5.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Guiahi M, Kenton K, Brubaker L. Sacrocolpopexy without concomitant posterior repair improves posterior compartment defects. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(9):1267–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Guiahi M, Kenton K, Brubaker L. Sacrocolpopexy without concomitant posterior repair improves posterior compartment defects. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(9):1267–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Bump RC, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRef Bump RC, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shih DQ, Kwan LY. All roads lead to Rome: update on Rome III criteria and new treatment options. Gastroenterol Rep. 2007;1(2):56–65.PubMedPubMedCentral Shih DQ, Kwan LY. All roads lead to Rome: update on Rome III criteria and new treatment options. Gastroenterol Rep. 2007;1(2):56–65.PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Kaser DJ, Kinsler EL, Mackenzie TA, Hanissian P, Strohbehn K, Whiteside JL. Anatomic and functional outcomes of sacrocolpopexy with or without posterior colporrhaphy. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(9):1215–20.CrossRefPubMed Kaser DJ, Kinsler EL, Mackenzie TA, Hanissian P, Strohbehn K, Whiteside JL. Anatomic and functional outcomes of sacrocolpopexy with or without posterior colporrhaphy. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(9):1215–20.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Crane AK, Geller EJ, Matthews CA. Outlet constipation 1 year after robotic Sacrocolpopexy with and without concomitant posterior repair. South Med J. 2013;106(7):409–14.CrossRefPubMed Crane AK, Geller EJ, Matthews CA. Outlet constipation 1 year after robotic Sacrocolpopexy with and without concomitant posterior repair. South Med J. 2013;106(7):409–14.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Lowder JL, Ghetti C, Nikolajski C, Oliphant SS, Zyczynski HM. Body image perceptions in women with pelvic organ prolapse: a qualitative study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204(5):441.e1–5.CrossRefPubMed Lowder JL, Ghetti C, Nikolajski C, Oliphant SS, Zyczynski HM. Body image perceptions in women with pelvic organ prolapse: a qualitative study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204(5):441.e1–5.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kahn MA, Stanton SL. Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(1):82–6.CrossRefPubMed Kahn MA, Stanton SL. Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(1):82–6.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Bradley CS, et al. Bowel symptoms in women 1 year after sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):642.e1–8.CrossRef Bradley CS, et al. Bowel symptoms in women 1 year after sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):642.e1–8.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR. Sexual function and vaginal anatomy in women before and after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(6):1610–5.CrossRefPubMed Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR. Sexual function and vaginal anatomy in women before and after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(6):1610–5.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Mellgren A, et al. Results of rectocele repair. A prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38(1):7–13.CrossRefPubMed Mellgren A, et al. Results of rectocele repair. A prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38(1):7–13.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Arnold MW, Stewart WR, Aguilar PS. Rectocele repair. Four years’ experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 1990;33(8):684–7.CrossRefPubMed Arnold MW, Stewart WR, Aguilar PS. Rectocele repair. Four years’ experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 1990;33(8):684–7.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Porter WE, Steele A, Walsh P, Kohli N, Karram MM. The anatomic and functional outcomes of defect-specific rectocele repairs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181(6):1353–8; discussion 1358-9.CrossRefPubMed Porter WE, Steele A, Walsh P, Kohli N, Karram MM. The anatomic and functional outcomes of defect-specific rectocele repairs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181(6):1353–8; discussion 1358-9.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Lewis C, Salamon C, Priestley JL, Gurshumov E, Culligan P. Prospective cohort study of bowel function after robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(2):87–9.CrossRefPubMed Lewis C, Salamon C, Priestley JL, Gurshumov E, Culligan P. Prospective cohort study of bowel function after robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(2):87–9.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Does concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele reduce the risk of surgical failure in patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy?
Authors
Olivia H. Chang
Emily R. W. Davidson
Tonya N. Thomas
Marie Fidela R. Paraiso
Cecile A. Ferrando
Publication date
01-10-2020
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04268-7

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

International Urogynecology Journal 10/2020 Go to the issue