Female pelvic organ prolapse using pessaries: systematic review
- 1.1k Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the impact of pessary use on the quality of life of women with pelvic organ prolapse, and to determine the satisfaction rate and rationale for discontinuation.
This review is recorded in the PROSPERO database under number CRD42015023384. The criteria for inclusion were observational study; cross section; cohort study; randomized controlled trial; study published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish; and study whose participants are women with female pelvic organ prolapse treated using a pessary. We did not include limitations on the year of publication. The criteria for exclusion included studies that did not include the topic, bibliographic or systematic reviews and articles that did not use validated questionnaires. The MeSH terms were “Pelvic Organ Prolapse AND Pessaries AND Quality of Life” OR “Pessary AND Quality of Life” OR “Pessaries”.
We found 89 articles. After the final analyses, seven articles were included. All articles associated pessary use with improved quality of life, and all used only validated questionnaires. Over half of the women continued using the pessary during the follow-up with acceptable levels of satisfaction. The main rationales for discontinuation were discomfort, pain in the area, and expulsion of the device.
This systematic review demonstrates that the pessary can produce a positive effect on women’s quality of life and can significantly improve sexual function and body perception.
KeywordsPelvic organ prolapse Pessaries Quality of life Sexual function Questionnaires
Compliance with ethical standards
Conficts of interest
- 3.Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY (2001) The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184(7):1496–1501, discussion 501–503Google Scholar
- 14.Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B et al (2016) ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 69:225–234Google Scholar
- 21.Lone F, Thakar R, Sultan AH (2015) 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 26(9):1305–1312Google Scholar
- 23.Chan SS, Cheung RY, Yiu KW, Lee LL, Pang AW, Chung TK (2012) Symptoms, quality of life, and factors affecting women’s treatment decisions regarding pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 23(8):1027–1033Google Scholar