Analysis of outcome of vaginal hysterectomy and pelvic floor repair by POPQ system

Komal Devnikar; Tushar Palve; Soheil Shaikh; Priya Bulchandani; Sejal Kulkarni; Rajashree Thatikonda

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20223486

Authors

Komal Devnikar Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Tushar Palve Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Soheil Shaikh Department of Surgery, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Priya Bulchandani Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Sejal Kulkarni Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Rajashree Thatikonda Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20223486

Keywords:

Pelvic organ prolapse quantification, Pelvic organ prolapse, Full term normal delivery, Lower segment cesarean section.

Abstract

Background: To assess the relief of symptoms and efficacy of vaginal hysterectomy and pelvic floor repair surgeries in patients with pelvic organ prolapse.

Methods: A total of 55 women participated in the study. Vaginal hysterectomy with or without anterior and posterior colporrhaphy and fothergills surgery were done in all cases. Patients were followed postoperatively about symptom relief and the anatomical correction was analyzed at 6 months using Pelvic Organ Prolapse-Quantification (POP-Q) System.

Results: The highest incidence of POP was between 41 to 50 years of age and in multiparous women with parity 2 and more than 4. 36.36% had stage III prolapse when measured using the POPQ classification. Something coming out per vaginum was the commonest complaint seen in 100% of the patients. The improvement of all symptoms was significant (p value <0.05).

Conclusions: There is significant anatomical restoration and symptom relief after surgery by POPQ.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Komal Devnikar, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Grant Government College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Department Of OBGY

References

Jelovsek JE, Maher C, Barber MD. Pelvic organ prolapse. Lancet. 2007;369:1027–38.

Hendrix SL, Clark A, Nygaard I, Aragaki A, Barnabei V, McTiernan A. Pelvic organ prolapse in the women’s health initiative: gravity and gravidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:1160–6.

Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, Kenton K, Meikle S, Schaffer J, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300:1311–6.

Rortveit G, Brown JS, Thom DH, Van Den Eeden SK, Creasman JM, Subak LL. Symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: prevalence and risk factors in a population-based, racially diverse cohort. Obstet Gyneco. 2007;109:1396–403.

Tegerstedt G, Maehle-Schmidt M, Nyrén O, Hammarström M. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse in a Swedish population. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005;16:497–503.

Kim SH. Diagnosis and treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Korean J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49:501–12.

Yuk JS, Lee JH, Hur JY, Shin JH. The prevalence and treatment pattern of clinically diagnosed pelvic organ prolapse: a Korean National Health Insurance Database-based cross-sectional study 2009–2015. Sci Rep. 2018;8:1334.

Olsen AL, Smith VG, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501-6.

Inal ZO, Inal HA. Comparison of abdominal, vaginal, and laparoscopic hysterectomies in a tertiary care hospital in Turkey. Ir J Med Sci. 2018;187:485–91.

Roovers JP, van der Bom JG, van der Vaart CH, Schagen van Leeuwen JH, Heintz AP. Abdominal versus vaginal approach for the management of genital prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13:224–31.

Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(1):CD003677.

Jeon MJ. Surgical decision making for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based approach. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2019;62:307–12.

Dallas K, Elliott CS, Syan R, Sohlberg E, Enemchukwu E, Rogo-Gupta L. Association between concomitant hysterectomy and repeat surgery for pelvic organ prolapse repair in a cohort of nearly 100,000 women. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132:1328–36.

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.

Smith F, Holman C, Moorin R, Tsokos N. Lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1096–100.

Lowenstein E, Ottesen B, Gimbel H. The incidence and lifetime risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Denmark from 1977 to 2009. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:49–55.

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.

Dhama V, Chaudhary R, Singh S, Singh M. Evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse by standardized pop q system for vaginal hysterectomy. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6:2584-8.

Pradhan T, Regmi MC, Rai R, Bhatta R, Rijal P, Uprety DK. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Assessment by POP-Q Technique. NJOG. 2013;8(2):26-9.