Is it worth preserving the uterus? unanticipated pathology in hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse (POP)

Deeksha Pandey; Pranadeep Reddy Inukollu; Jyothi Shetty; Shripad Hebbar; Muralidhar V. Pai; Pratap Kumar

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184143

Authors

Deeksha Pandey Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Pranadeep Reddy Inukollu Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Jyothi Shetty Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Shripad Hebbar Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Muralidhar V. Pai Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Pratap Kumar Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184143

Keywords:

Hysterectomy, Pelvic organ prolapse, Uterus

Abstract

Background: In recent years concept of uterine conservation has been increasing at the time of surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). This study was intended to assess the risk of premalignant and malignant uterine/endometrial, and cervical pathology at the time of hysterectomy-based POP procedures, to better understand the risks of uterine conservation in the surgical treatment of POP in Indian setup.

Methods: Patients who had undergone vaginal hysterectomy for POP in last five years were identified by medical record tracking using ICD-9 codes. Case records then were reviewed to collect patient characteristics and the final histopathological diagnosis of the hysterectomy specimen. Cases with premalignant or malignant uterine/endometrial or cervical pathology recognized prior to surgery were excluded.

Results: A total of 573 women who underwent vaginal hysterectomy and pelvic floor repair for the sole indication of POP were included. On analyzing the histopathological diagnosis of the specimen obtained during surgery in 57.1% of cases the findings were consistent with the changes seen in cases of POP. Only 5.9 % of cases had cervical or endometrial pathologies who would have required treatment/follow up in future if the uterus was left in situ.

Conclusions: The risk of missing a malignant and premalignant cervical or uterine pathology in women presenting with uterine prolapse is low if appropriate preoperative workup has been done. Uterine preservation in surgical management of POP could be considered an option.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Farthmann J, Watermann D, Erbes T, Roth K, Nanovska P, Gitsch G, et al. Functional outcome after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;291(3):573-7.

Costantini E, Porena M, Lazzeri M, Mearini L, Bini V, Zucchi A. Changes in female sexual function after pelvic organ prolapse repair: role of hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(9):14817.

Frick AC, Walters MD, Larkin KS, Barber MD. Risk of unanticipated abnormal gynecologic pathology at the time of hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(5):507e1-4.

Andy UU, Nosti PA, Kane S, White D, Lowenstein L, Gutman RE, et al. Incidence of unanticipated uterine pathology at the time of minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol.2014;21(1):97-100.

Grigoriadis T, Valla A, Zacharakis D, Protopapas A, Athanasiou S. Vaginal hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse: what is the incidence of concurrent gynecological malignancy? Int Urogynecol J. 2015 ;26(3):421-5.

Ramm O, Gleason JL, Segal S, Antosh DD, Kenton KS. Utility of preoperative endometrial assessment in asymptomatic women undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(7):913-7.

Renganathan A, Edwards R, Duckett JR. Uterus conserving prolapse surgery-what is the chance of missing a malignancy? Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(7):819-21.

Wan OY, Cheung RY, Chan SS, Chung TK. Risk of malignancy 173 in women who underwent hysterectomy for uterine prolapse. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;53(2):190-6.

Gungorduk K, Ulker V, Sahbaz A, Ark C, Tekirdag AI. Postmenopausal tuberculosis endometritis. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2007;2007:27028.

Frick AC, Barber MD, Paraiso MF, Ridgeway B, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD. Attitudes toward hysterectomy in women undergoing evaluation for uterovaginal prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19(2):103-9.

Wong K, Jakus-Waldman S, Yazdany T. Patient beliefs regarding hysterectomy in women seeking surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: findings in a predominantly Hispanic population. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(5):267-71.

Korbly NB, Kassis NC, Good MM, Richardson ML, Book NM, Yip S, et al. Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):470 e1-6.

1American Urogynecologic Society Best Practice Statement: Evaluation and Counseling of Patients With Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(5):281-7.

Pakbaz M, Rolfsman E, Lofgren M. Are women adequately informed before gynaecological surgery? BMC Womens Health. 2017;17(1):68.