Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-06-2012 | General Gynecology

Women’s well-being after Manchester procedure for pelvic reconstruction with uterine preservation: a follow-up study

Authors: Michal Liebergall-Wischnitzer, Assaf Ben-Meir, Orly Sarid, Julie Cwikel, Yuval Lavy

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 6/2012

Abstract

Purpose

This study describes the outcomes of a modified Manchester procedure on the quality of life and sexual functioning of women with elongation of the uterine cervix with or without pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods

Data on medical and demographic variables were collected from medical files and then women were invited to for follow-up examination and data collection.

Results

Follow-up data were collected from 53 out of 87 women who underwent reconstructive surgery with modified Manchester procedure (60.9% of the women). Prior the surgery, all women in this sample (n = 53) were medically examined and found to have uterine cervix elongation, 40/53 (75.4%) women also had cystocele, 10/53 women (18.8%) had uterine prolapse and 8/53 women (15.1%) had rectocele (all stages II–IV). On follow-up examination, all the cervical stumps were satisfactorily situated, recurrent cystocele was found among 12/53 women (22.6%) women; 13/53 (24.5%) had rectocele; and none of these women had uterine prolapse. Women with POP (cystocele and rectocele) (24/53) had less operative satisfaction (p = 0.004), lower quality of life (p < 0.05 in 3 out of 8 domains), and poorer sexual function (p = 0.03) compared to women without POP (29/53).

Conclusion

The modified Manchester procedure including reconstructive surgery for women with cervix elongation, with or without POP, prevented recurrent uterine prolapse and was well received in terms of patient’s satisfaction, quality of life, and sexual function.

DeLancey J, Richardson A (1992) Anatomy of genial support. In: Benson J (ed) Female pelvic floor disorders. Norton Medical Books, New York

Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Adams EJ, Hagen S, Glazener CM (2010) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD004014

Hagen S, Stark D, Maher C, Adams E (2008) Conservative management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD003882

Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506PubMedCrossRef

DeLancey JO (2005) The hidden epidemic of pelvic floor dysfunction: achievable goals for improved prevention and treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1488–1495PubMedCrossRef

Lawrence JM, Lukacz ES, Nager CW, Hsu JW, Luber KM (2008) Prevalence and co-occurrence of pelvic floor disorders in community-dwelling women. Obstet Gynecol 111:678–685PubMedCrossRef

MacLennan AH, Taylor A, David H (2000) The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders and their relationship to gender, age, parity and mode of delivery. Int J Obstet Gynaecol 107:1460–1470CrossRef

Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Robinson D, Salvatore S (2005) P-QOL: a validated questionnaire to assess the symptoms and quality of life of women with urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16:176–81 (discussion 81)

Liebergall-Wischnitzer M, Hochner-Celnikier D, Lavy Y, Manor O, Shveiky D, Paltiel O (2009) Randomized trial of circular muscle versus pelvic floor training for stress urinary incontinence in women. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 18:377–385CrossRef

10.

Rogers GR, Villarreal A, Kammerer-Doak D, Qualls C (2001) Sexual function in women with and without urinary incontinence and/or pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 12:361–365PubMedCrossRef

11.

Jelovsek JE, Maher C, Barber MD (2007) Pelvic organ prolapse. Lancet 369:1027–1038PubMedCrossRef

12.

Diwan A, Rardin CR, Kohli N (2004) Uterine preservation during surgery for uterovaginal prolapse: a review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 15:286–292PubMed

13.

Zucchi A, Lazzeri M, Porena M, Mearini L, Costantini E (2010) Uterus preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Nat Rev Urol 7:626–633PubMedCrossRef

14.

Petros P (2000) Influence of hysterectomy on pelvic-floor dysfunction. Lancet 356:1275PubMedCrossRef

15.

de Boer TA, Milani AL, Kluivers KB, Withagen MI, Vierhout ME (2009) The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20:1313–1319PubMedCrossRef

16.

Thys SD, Coolen AL, Martens IR et al (2011) A comparison of long-term outcome between Manchester Fothergill and vaginal hysterectomy as treatment for uterine descent. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 22(9):1171–1178CrossRef

17.

Costantini E, Mearini L, Bini V, Zucchi A, Mearini E, Porena M (2005) Uterus preservation in surgical correction of urogenital prolapse. Eur Urol 48:642–649PubMedCrossRef

18.

Hefni M, El-Toukhy T, Bhaumik J, Katsimanis E (2003) Sacrospinous cervicocolpopexy with uterine conservation for uterovaginal prolapse in elderly women: an evolving concept. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:645–650PubMedCrossRef

19.

Ayhan A, Esin S, Guven S, Salman C, Ozyuncu O (2006) The Manchester operation for uterine prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 92:228–233PubMedCrossRef

20.

Baden WF, Walker TA, Lindsey JH (1968) The vaginal profile. Tex Med 64:56–58PubMed

21.

Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM et al (2010) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn 29:4–20PubMed

22.

Ozel B, White T, Urwitz-Lane R, Minaglia S (2006) The impact of pelvic organ prolapse on sexual function in women with urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17:14–17PubMedCrossRef

23.

de Oliveira MS, Tamanini JT, de Aguiar Cavalcanti G (2009) Validation of the Prolapse Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) in Portuguese version in Brazilian women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20:1191–1202PubMedCrossRef

24.

Svihrova V, Digesu GA, Svihra J, Hudeckova H, Kliment J, Swift S (2010) Validation of the Slovakian version of the P-QOL questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 21:53–61CrossRef

25.

Fenton KA, Johnson AM, McManus S, Erens B (2001) Measuring sexual behaviour: methodological challenges in survey research. Sex Transm Infect 77:84–92PubMedCrossRef

Title: Women’s well-being after Manchester procedure for pelvic reconstruction with uterine preservation: a follow-up study
Authors: Michal Liebergall-Wischnitzer
Assaf Ben-Meir
Orly Sarid
Julie Cwikel
Yuval Lavy
Publication date: 01-06-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 6/2012
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-011-2195-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Women’s well-being after Manchester procedure for pelvic reconstruction with uterine preservation: a follow-up study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2012

Measures for peripartum hysterectomy for placenta previa accreta: avoiding uterotonic agents and “double distal edge pickup” mass ligation

Clomiphene citrate alternatives for the initial management of polycystic ovary syndrome: an evidence-based approach

Postnatal neuro-development of fetuses with absent end-diastolic flow in the umbilical artery and/or fetal descending aorta

Caesarean section scar depicted in a ca. 2,500-year-old kylix

Comparison of uterine exteriorization and in situ repair during cesarean sections

Myocardial infarction in an young patient associated with oral contraceptive, smoking and elevated cholesterol level