Top

Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports

Published in:

01-12-2017 | Urogynecology (S Pulliam and N Kohli, Section Editors)

Update on Surgical Treatments for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Author: Emily E. Weber LeBrun

Published in: Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports | Issue 4/2017

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to update readers on recent controversies and current evidence regarding surgical procedures for the treatment of female pelvic organ prolapse.

Recent Findings

Topics discussed include the role of patient selection and individualized care that involves the patient in surgical decision-making. Perioperative decisions reflect rapidly advancing technology, innovations in surgical technique, surgical training, and surgeon’s own unique preferences, all of which provide an opportunity for improved outcomes and also require deliberate attention to unanticipated patient safety concerns.

Summary

Pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse requires an appreciation for complex pelvic anatomy and advanced surgical training. In a field focused on patient-centered quality of life outcomes, it is imperative to involve the patient in the decision-making process while also balancing differences in surgeons’ skills, biases, and available technology. These topics are explored in detail and offered a thoughtful approach to surgical management.

Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, Pate V, Jonsson FM. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1201–6. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000286.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Food and Drug Administration. Update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. 2011. http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/safety/alertsandnotices/ucm262435.htm.

Barbalat Y, Tunuguntla HS. Surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a historical perspective. Curr Urol Rep. 2012;13(3):256–61. doi:10.1007/s11934-012-0249-x.CrossRefPubMed

•• Fairchild PS, Kamdar NS, Berger MB, Morgan DM. Rates of colpopexy and colporrhaphy at the time of hysterectomy for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(2):262 e1–7. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.053. This timely study sheds light on current practice patterns in the surgical treatment of prolapse using recently approved quality measures. CrossRef

Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.CrossRefPubMed

Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMed

Baden WF, Walker TA. Genesis of the vaginal profile: a correlated classification of vaginal relaxation. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1972;15(4):1048–54.CrossRefPubMed

• Krissi H, Eitan R, Ram E, Peled Y. How accurate is preoperative evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse in women undergoing vaginal reconstruction surgery? PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47027. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047027. This study highlights the importance of a very thorough and accurate pre-operative assessment of prolapse, especially in patients for whom a suspension procedure could indicate a concomitant hysterectomy. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Swenson CW, Smith TM, Luo J, Kolenic GE, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Intraoperative cervix location and apical support stiffness in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(2):155.e1–8. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.09.074.CrossRef

10.

McPencow AM, Erekson EA, Guess MK, Martin DK, Patel DA, Xu X. Cost-effectiveness of endometrial evaluation prior to morcellation in surgical procedures for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(1):22.e1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2013.03.033.CrossRef

11.

Crisp CC, Book NM, Smith AL, Cunkelman JA, Mishan V, Treszezamsky AD, et al. Body image, regret, and satisfaction following colpocleisis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):473 e1–7. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2013.05.019.CrossRef

12.

Society CoPBGatAU. Practice bulletin no. 176: pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(4):e56–72. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002016.CrossRef

13.

Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, Hsu Y, DeLancey JO. Interaction among apical support, levator ani impairment, and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(2):324–32. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000227786.69257.a8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Summers A, Winkel LA, Hussain HK, DeLancey JO. The relationship between anterior and apical compartment support. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(5):1438–43. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.057.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

• Rooney K, Kenton K, Mueller ER, FitzGerald MP, Brubaker L. Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(6):1837–40. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.065. The authors identify one of the main factors associated with surgical failure of anterior vaginal prolapse repairs, that is, inadequate apical support. CrossRefPubMed

16.

•• Chen L, Lisse S, Larson K, Berger MB, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Structural failure sites in anterior vaginal wall prolapse: identification of a collinear triad. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(4):853–62. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001652. This innovative study provides some evidence to explain the tissue effects of biomechanical forces and correlation to anatomic findings. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

• Geynisman-Tan J, Kenton K. Surgical updates in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017;8(2). doi:10.5041/RMMJ.10294. This manuscript provides a thorough review of evidence supporting the variety of surgical procedures available for treating pelvic organ prolapse.

18.

Kearney R, DeLancey JO. Selecting suspension points and excising the vagina during Michigan four-wall sacrospinous suspension. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(2):325–30.PubMed

19.

Shull BL, Bachofen C, Coates KW, Kuehl TJ. A transvaginal approach to repair of apical and other associated sites of pelvic organ prolapse with uterosacral ligaments. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183(6):1365–1373; discussion 73-4. doi:10.1067/mob.2000.110910.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Larson KA, Smith T, Berger MB, Abernethy M, Mead S, Fenner DE, et al. Long-term patient satisfaction with Michigan four-wall sacrospinous ligament suspension for prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(5):967–75. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a7f0d5.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Maher CF, Murray CJ, Carey MP, Dwyer PL, Ugoni AM. Iliococcygeus or sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(1):40–4.PubMed

22.

Bradley MS, Bickhaus JA, Amundsen CL, Newcomb LK, Truong T, Weidner AC, et al. Vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: a retrospective cohort of absorbable and permanent suture groups. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017; doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000451.

23.

Chung CP, Miskimins R, Kuehl TJ, Yandell PM, Shull BL. Permanent suture used in uterosacral ligament suspension offers better anatomical support than delayed absorbable suture. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(2):223–7. doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1556-3.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Kasturi S, Bentley-Taylor M, Woodman PJ, Terry CL, Hale DS. High uterosacral ligament vaginal vault suspension: comparison of absorbable vs. permanent suture for apical fixation. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(7):941–5. doi:10.1007/s00192-012-1708-0.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Rardin CR, Erekson EA, Sung VW, Ward RM, Myers DL. Uterosacral colpopexy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy: comparison of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches. J Reprod Med. 2009;54(5):273–80.PubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Turner LC, Lavelle ES, Shepherd JP. Comparison of complications and prolapse recurrence between laparoscopic and vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for the treatment of vaginal prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(5):797–803. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2897-0.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Barber MD. Pelvic organ prolapse. BMJ. 2016;354:i3853.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Arenholt LTS, Pedersen BG, Glavind K, Glavind-Kristensen M, DeLancey JOL. Paravaginal defect: anatomy, clinical findings, and imaging. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(5):661–73. doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3096-3.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, Adams EJ, Hagen S. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: a short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(1):3–12. doi:10.1002/nau.20542.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Darzi S, Urbankova I, Su K, White J, Lo C, Alexander D, et al. Tissue response to collagen containing polypropylene meshes in an ovine vaginal repair model. Acta Biomater. 2016;39:114–23. doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2016.05.010.CrossRefPubMed

31.

•• Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Marjoribanks J. Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD012079. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012079. This comprehensive review provides a rare, balanced evidence regarding the role of mesh-augmented prolapse repairs. PubMed

32.

Costantini E, Brubaker L, Cervigni M, Matthews CA, O'Reilly BA, Rizk D, et al. Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based review and recommendations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:60–5. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.503.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Nosti PA, Carter CM, Sokol AI, Tefera E, Iglesia CB, Park AJ, et al. Transvaginal versus transabdominal placement of synthetic mesh at time of sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(3):151–5. doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000222.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Cundiff GW, Varner E, Visco AG, Zyczynski HM, Nager CW, Norton PA, et al. Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(6):688.e1–5. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.07.029.CrossRef

35.

McDermott CD, Hale DS. Abdominal, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2009;36(3):585–614. doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2009.09.004.CrossRef

36.

Siddiqui NY, Grimes CL, Casiano ER, Abed HT, Jeppson PC, Olivera CK, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44–55. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000570.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Detollenaere RJ, den Boon J, Stekelenburg J, IntHout J, Vierhout ME, Kluivers KB, et al. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2015;351:h3717.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Brubaker L, Cundiff GW, Fine P, Nygaard I, Richter HE, Visco AG, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(15):1557–66. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa054208.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Wei JT, Nygaard I, Richter HE, Nager CW, Barber MD, Kenton K, et al. A midurethral sling to reduce incontinence after vaginal prolapse repair. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(25):2358–67. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1111967.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(6 Pt 1):1717–24. discussion 24-8CrossRefPubMed

41.

• Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for postoperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations—part II. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):323–32. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.12.019. References 41 and 42 are paired guidelines which summarize the benefits of adopting an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach for patients undergoing gynecologic surgery. CrossRefPubMed

42.

• Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for pre- and intra-operative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations—part I. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):313–22. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.11.015. References 41 and 42 are paired guidelines which summarize the benefits of adopting an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach for patients undergoing gynecologic surgery. CrossRefPubMed

43.

Elkadry EA, Kenton KS, FitzGerald MP, Shott S, Brubaker L. Patient-selected goals: a new perspective on surgical outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189(6):1551–7. discussion 7-8CrossRefPubMed

44.

Hullfish KL, Bovbjerg VE, Steers WD. Patient-centered goals for pelvic floor dysfunction surgery: long-term follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(1):201–5. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.086.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Komesu YM, Rogers RG, Rode MA, Craig EC, Schrader RM, Gallegos KA, et al. Patient-selected goal attainment for pessary wearers: what is the clinical relevance? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):577 e1–5. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.12.033.CrossRef

Title: Update on Surgical Treatments for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Author: Emily E. Weber LeBrun
Publication date: 01-12-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports / Issue 4/2017
Electronic ISSN: 2161-3303
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-017-0221-3

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Update on Surgical Treatments for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Urodynamic Testing: Choosing Between Simple Versus Complex

Preventable Surgical Harm in Gynecologic Oncology: Optimizing Quality and Patient Safety

Cognitive Impairment and Pelvic Floor Disorders

Urge Incontinence: Updates in Non-pharmacologic Treatments

Postpartum LARC: Best Practices, Policy and Public Health Implications

Urogynecologic Care of the Transgender Patient