Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Nonsurgical vs. Surgical Treatment Options for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Review of the Current Evidence

  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse (M Weinstein, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nonsurgical management of pelvic organ prolapse is generally accepted as first-line therapy for symptomatic patients and includes expectant management, pelvic floor muscle training, or pessary use. The objective of this article is to review the available evidence comparing nonsurgical and surgical options for pelvic organ prolapse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, Myers ER. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(6):1278–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins - Gynecology. ACOG practice bulletin No, 85: pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(3):717–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brækken IH, Majida M, Engh ME, Bø K. Can pelvic floor muscle training reverse pelvic organ prolapse and reduce prolapse symptoms? An assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(2):170. e1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ghroubi S, Kharrat O, Chaari M, Ben Ayed B, Guermazi M, Elleuch MH. Effect of conservative treatment in the management of low-degree urogenital prolapse. Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2008;51:96–102.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hagen S, Stark D, Glazener C, Sinclair L, Ramsay I. A randomised controlled trial of pelvic floor muscle training for stage I and II pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2009;20:45–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hagen S, Stark D. Conservative prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapsed in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;12. Important reference on this topic of prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse.

  8. Hagen S, Stark D, Glazener C, Dickson S, Barry S, Elders A, et al. Individualised pelvic floor muscle training in women with pelvic organ prolapse (POPPY): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9919):796–806.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bugge C, Adams EJ, Gopinath D, Reid F. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2

  10. Cundiff GW, Weidner AC, Visco AG, Bump RC, Addison WA. A survey of pessary use by members of the American Urogynecologic Society. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(6):931–5. Part 1.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Clemons JL, Aguilar VC, Tillinghast TA, Jackson ND, Myers DL. Risk factors associated with an unsuccessful pessary fitting trial in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(2):345–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Geoffrion R, Zhang T, Lee T, Cudiff GW. Clinical characteristics associated with unsuccessful pessary fitting outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19(6):339–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cundiff GW, Amundsen CL, Bent AE, Coates KW, Schaffer JI, Strohbehn K, et al. The PESSRI study: symptom relief outcomes of a randomized crossover trial of the ring and Gellhorn pessaries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196(4):405–e1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sarma S, Ying T, Moore KH. Long-term vaginal ring pessary use: discontinuation rates and adverse events. BJOG. 2009;116(13):1715–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lone F, Thakar R, Sultan AH, Karamalis G. A 5-year prospective study of vaginal pessary use for pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;114(1):56–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tenfelde S, Tell D, Thomas TN, Kenton K. Quality of life in women who use pessaries for longer than 12 months. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2015;21(3):146–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wiegersma M, Panman CM, Kollen BJ, Vermeulen KM, Schram AJ, Messelink EJ, et al. Pelvic floor muscle training versus watchful waiting or pessary treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POPPS): design and participant baseline characteristics of two parallel pragmatic randomized controlled trials in primary care. Maturitas. 2014;77(2):168–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Abdool Z, Thakar R, Sultan AH, Oliver RS. Prospective evaluation of outcome of vaginal pessaries versus surgery in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(3):273–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lone F, Thakar R, Sultan AH. One-year prospective comparison of vaginal pessaries and surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the validated ICIQ-VS and ICIQ-UI (SF) questionnaires. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(9):1305–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jarvis SK, Hallam TK, Lujic S, Abbott JA, Vancaillie TG. Peri-operative physiotherapy improves outcomes for women undergoing incontinence and or prolapse surgery: results of a randomised controlled trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;45:300–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Frawley HC, Phillips BA, Bø K, Galea MP. Physiotherapy as an adjunct to prolapse surgery: an assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29:719–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Barber MD, Brubaker L, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Weidner AC, et al. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1023–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanaz R. Ferzandi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Nathan Kow, Lauren Siff, and Tanaz R. Ferzandi declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kow, N., Siff, L. & Ferzandi, T.R. Nonsurgical vs. Surgical Treatment Options for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Review of the Current Evidence. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 5, 172–175 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-016-0157-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-016-0157-z

Keywords

Navigation