Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Pelvic organ prolapse in pregnancy is rare. Consequent complications include cervical infection, spontaneous abortion, and premature birth. Conservative management by means of a pessary have been described as improving maternal symptomatology and minimizing gestational risk. The delivery mode is controversial.

Objective: To describe the clinical courses of patients diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy, and to present our multidisciplinary approach.

Methods: In this retrospective case series, we summarized the obstetrical outcomes of women diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy in a single university-affiliated hospital.

Results: We identified eight women with advanced uterine prolapse at a mean age of 30.3 years. Seven were diagnosed with advanced uterine prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification [POPQ] stage ≥ 3). All were treated by pessary placement, which was tolerable and provided symptomatic relief. The pessary type was chosen according to the prolapse stage. In women with cervical prolapse POPQ stage > 2 and cervical edema, a support pessary was less beneficial. However, the prolapse was well-controlled with a space-filling Gellhorn pessary. Low complication rates were associated with vaginal deliveries. The few complications that were reported included minor cervical laceration, postpartum hemorrhage, and retained placenta.

Conclusions: Treatment of pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy must be individualized and requires a multidisciplinary approach of urogynecologists, obstetricians, dietitians, pelvic floor physiotherapists, and social workers. Conservative management, consisting of insertion of a vaginal pessary when prolapse symptoms appeared, provided adequate support for the pelvic floor, improved symptomatology, and minimized pregnancy complications. Vaginal delivery was feasible for most of the women.

Background: Obliterative vaginal procedures may offer lower perioperative morbidity and equal success rates as reconstructive procedures for frail and elderly women who no longer desire future coital function. The combination of vaginal hysterectomy with either reconstructive or obliterative vaginal procedures has not yet been investigated.

Objectives: To compare peri- and postoperative outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy with pelvic floor reconstruction (VHR) vs. vaginal hysterectomy with colpocleisis (VHC).

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study comparing medical and surgical data of patients undergoing either VHR or VHC between 2006 and 2015. Data were obtained from inpatient and outpatient medical records including peri- and postoperative course, as well as long-term (24 months) follow-up data.

Results: We identified 172 patients who underwent VHR and 44 who underwent VHC. Patients in the VHC group were significantly older (71.3 ± 4.5 vs. 68.6 ± 6.5 years, P = 0.01), and more likely to have medical co-morbidities (P = 0.001 and P = 0.029, respectively). Patients in the VHC group experienced shorter operative time (2.3 ± 0.58 vs. 2.7 ± 1.02 hours, P = 0.007), lower perioperative blood loss (P < 0.0001), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.0001), and lower rates of postoperative urinary retention. Long-term pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence rates were significantly higher among the VHR group. Postoperative resolution of both stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder were common in both groups.

Conclusions: VHC is associated with lower perioperative blood loss, shorter operative time, shorter hospital stay, shorter time with an indwelling catheter, and lower long-term objective POP recurrence rates.

Background: Diagnosing occult stress urinary incontinence (OSUI) prior to surgical intervention for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair may allow for adding an anti-incontinence procedure and thus prevent postoperative SUI.

Objectives: To compare preoperative detection rates for OSUI by either a multichannel urodynamic investigation or by a plain pelvic examination.

Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the medical charts of all women who underwent urodynamic investigation prior to surgical repair of advanced POP at our institution between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2012.

Results: In total, 720 women underwent surgical POP repair during the study period, of whom 54 (7.5%) were diagnosed with OSUI preoperatively. Of these patients, 54 (100%) were detected by multichannel urodynamic investigation while only 27 (50%) were detected by a plain pelvic examination (P = 0.001). Bladder fullness during the pelvic examination was associated with higher detection rates for OSUI (P = 0.001). Women with OSUI who underwent concomitant tension-free vaginal tape and POP repair procedures did not develop de novo SUI or obstructive voiding symptoms (OVS) postoperatively.

Conclusions: Preoperative multichannel urodynamic investigation has significantly higher detection rates for OSUI than a plain pelvic examination. Utilizing this modality resulted in no cases of de novo SUI or OVS postoperatively.

The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) varies greatly and is reported to be between 3% and 50% differing greatly when based on POP symptoms or vaginal examination [1]. Age is a well-established risk factor in the reported prevalence of POP [2]. With advancing age, the prevalence escalates dramatically, from 6% at age of 30 years to over 50% at the age of 80 years [3]. The increase in life expectancy observed in recent years will most probably be accompanied by a respective increase in the absolute numbers of women presenting with POP [4]. POP is a major health burden and is expected to continue being so in the upcoming future; hence, the importance of a safe and efficient treatment.

Background: Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and colpocleisis are both used for the treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Objective: To compare short- and long-term outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy vs. colpocleisis for advanced POP.

Methods: Hospital and outpatient charts of patients who underwent VH or colpocleisis at our institution between January 2006 and December 2015 were reviewed. Clinical data were obtained and analyzed.

Results: In this study, 188 patients underwent VH and 32 patients underwent colpocleisis. The colpocleisis group was significantly older than the VH group (79.5 ± 4.5 vs. 69 ± 6.1 years respectively, P < 0.0001) and presented with significantly higher co-morbidity rates and a higher degree of POP. Perioperative blood loss was significantly lower (250 ± 7.6 ml vs. 300 ± 115 ml, P < 0.0001) and postoperative hospitalization was significantly shorter (2 ± 2.7 vs. 3 ± 2.2 days, P = 0.015) among the colpocleisis group. None of the patients from the colpocleisis group required an indwelling urethral catheter after discharge, compared to 27.5% of the patients from the VH group (P = 0.001). Total postoperative complication rate was significantly lower among the colpocleisis group (25% vs. 31% P < 0.0001). Objective recurrence of POP was significantly more common among the VH group (7% vs. 0% and 21% vs. 0% for the anterior and posterior compartments, respectively, P = 0.04).

Conclusions: Colpocleisis is associated with faster recovery, lower perioperative morbidity, and higher success rates than VH and should be considered for frail and elderly patients.

Background: Hysterectomy is common in the management of symptomatic uterine prolapse. Vaginal wall repair is often necessary, for which vaginal mesh remains a popular option.

Objectives: To evaluate the risk of mesh erosion following mesh-augmented vaginal prolapse repair, with or without concomitant vaginal hysterectomy.

Methods: This retrospective cohort comprised 70 women who underwent vaginal mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repair from 2007 to 2010. Of the participants, 36 (51.4%) had a vaginal hysterectomy concomitant to the anterior and/or posterior vaginal mesh repair (hysterectomy group) and 34 (48.6%) underwent mesh repair without vaginal hysterectomy (no hysterectomy group).

Results: There were no inter-group differences in age, parity, menopausal state, hormonal use, or presenting symptoms. Previous prolapse repair surgery was much more common in the no hysterectomy group (29.4% vs. 5.5%, P = 0.01). Eleven patients (32.3%) in the no hysterectomy group had previously undergone hysterectomy. Anterior mesh repair was performed in 77.7% and 67.6% of hysterectomy and no hysterectomy patients, respectively. Posterior mesh repair was performed in 27.7% and 44.1%, respectively. One patient in the hysterectomy group underwent immediate removal of mesh due to infection. Surgically treated mesh erosion (limited local excision) occurred in three patients (8.3%) in the hysterectomy group (3, 16, and 18 months following surgery) and in two patients (5.8%) in the no hysterectomy group at 6 months following surgery (P = 0.67).

Conclusions: Vaginal mesh-augmentation concomitant with vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse repair does not carry an increased risk of erosion.