LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Outcomes of native tissue transvaginal apical approaches in women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence

Photo from wikipedia

Introduction and hypothesis Limited data exist comparing different surgical approaches in women with advanced vaginal prolapse. This study compared 2-year surgical outcomes of uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) and sacrospinous ligament… Click to show full abstract

Introduction and hypothesis Limited data exist comparing different surgical approaches in women with advanced vaginal prolapse. This study compared 2-year surgical outcomes of uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) in women with advanced prolapse (stage III–IV) and stress urinary incontinence. Methods This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial randomized trial comparing (1) ULS versus SSLF and (2) behavioral therapy with pelvic floor muscle training versus usual care. Of 374 subjects, 117/188 (62.7%) in the ULS and 113/186 (60.7%) in the SSLF group had advanced prolapse. Two-year surgical success was defined by the absence of (1) apical descent > 1/3 into the vaginal canal, (2) anterior/posterior wall descent beyond the hymen, (3) bothersome bulge symptoms, and (4) retreatment for prolapse. Secondary outcomes included individual success outcome components, symptom severity measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory, and adverse events. Outcomes were also compared in women with advanced prolapse versus stage II prolapse. Results Success did not differ between groups (ULS: 58.2% [57/117] versus SSLF: 58.5% [55/113], aOR 1.0 [0.5–1.8]). No differences were detected in individual success components ( p  > 0.05 for all components). Prolapse symptom severity scores improved in both interventions with no intergroup differences ( p  = 0.82). Serious adverse events did not differ (ULS: 19.7% versus SSLF: 16.8%, aOR 1.2 [0.6–2.4]). Success was lower in women with advanced prolapse compared with stage II (58.3% versus 73.2%, aOR 0.5 [0.3–0.9]), with no retreatment in stage II. Conclusions Surgical success, symptom severity, and overall serious adverse events did not differ between ULS and SSLF in women with advanced prolapse. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01166373.

Keywords: women advanced; advanced prolapse; prolapse; success; versus; approaches women

Journal Title: International Urogynecology Journal
Year Published: 2020

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.